[CTRL] Gulf War 2 - The Game

[Jei]

-Caveat Lector-

http://www.idleworm.com/nws/2002/11/iraq2.shtml

An accurate prediction of the future...

A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A
DECLARATION  DISCLAIMER
==
CTRL is a discussion  informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.

Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]/A

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 A HREF=http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/;ctrl/A

To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

[CTRL] blueprint for a right-wing assault

[Euphorian]

-Caveat Lector-

World Socialist Web Site www.wsws.org

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/feb2003/budg-f11.shtml


WSWS : News  Analysis : North America

The Bush budget: blueprint for a right-wing assault on the working class

Part one of five articles on Bush's 2004 budget proposal

By Patrick Martin
11 February 2003

Back to screen version| Send this link by email | Email the author

This is the first in a series of articles on the social implications and political
significance of the Bush administration’s fiscal 2004 budget plan. Over the
next four days, the WSWS will publish detailed analyses of the budget’s tax
proposals, its impact on programs benefiting the poor, its implications for
the federal Medicare and Medicaid health insurance programs, and its
consequences for public education.

The Bush administration unveiled its proposed 2004 budget and its new
Economic Report of the President last week. These two documents,
together with a series of statements and proposals drafted by various
cabinet departments, amount to a blueprint for a social transformation of
immense proportions.

What is being prepared by the extreme-right ideologues and worshippers
of the capitalist “free market” who comprise the Bush administration’s
cadre is nothing less than the dismantling of all domestic social programs in
the United States, from welfare to public education. They seek to roll
back the clock to the nineteenth century, putting an end to all attempts
to mitigate the massive social inequality generated by the profit system,
and removing all restrictions on the accumulation of wealth by the
American financial oligarchy.

As the Washington Post pointed out February 9 in a lengthy analysis of
Bush’s tax and budget policies for fiscal 2004, the administration is “casting
aside decades of efforts to close the gap between rich and poor.”

The social implications of the Bush budget have been largely ignored by
the mass media, which is focused on bombarding the population with
administration propaganda in support of the war drive against Iraq. The
corporate-controlled media is concealing from the American people what
constitutes an unprecedented attack on their living standards and social
conditions.

There is a profound connection between the government’s foreign and
domestic policies. The Bush administration is engaged in a war on two
fronts: overseas, targeting oil-rich Iraq for occupation and plunder, to be
followed by other countries such as Iran and North Korea; at home,
targeting the working class, with the aim of destroying what remains of the
social gains wrested from the ruling elite in the course of a century of
struggles to extend democratic rights and establish benefits such as
education, health care and pensions.

Bush’s budget demonstrates that the drive of US imperialism for global
hegemony is incompatible with American working people’s elementary
standards of social well-being and democratic rights.

In domestic as well as foreign policy, the real aims of the administration
are thinly disguised by lying on an unprecedented scale. Bush’s State of
the Union Speech was replete with distortions and falsifications: depicting
a tax cut for the super-rich as a plan to aid jobless workers, presenting a
plan to sabotage Medicare as a great expansion and improvement of the
health care system, and portraying measures to browbeat the poor and
subject them to compulsory religious indoctrination as examples of
“compassionate conservatism.”

The administration’s proposals on the environment employ the Orwellian
language that has become its trademark: the “Clear Skies Initiative” is
Bush’s plan to free air polluters from government regulation, opening
national forests to timber interests is labeled the “Healthy Forest
Initiative,” a billion-dollar handout to the auto companies to develop a
future hydrogen- powered vehicle is promoted as a plan to build a
“Freedom Car.”

The 2004 budget is not really a budget at all. It is not a document that
proposes specific spending for the fiscal year and compares cost and
income projections to 2003. No budget has yet been adopted for fiscal
2003, which began last September 30, except for the Pentagon and the
Department of Veterans Affairs. A spending bill for the rest of the
government, a $391 billion package combining 11 appropriations bills, failed
to gain congressional passage last fall and still awaits House and Senate
action. The Senate version of this bill provides, among other things, for a
2.9 percent across-the-board reduction in all domestic social spending, a
figure nowhere reflected in the Bush administration’s 2004 budget.

The new budget report proposes year-to-year increases and decreases by
comparing the fiscal 2004 request with what the Bush administration
requested a year ago for fiscal 2003. The actual amounts to be
appropriated and the real changes from year to year are unknown.

In broad outlines, the 2004 Bush budget calls for outlays totaling $2.23

[CTRL] They've got some crazy people over there.

[Euphorian]

-Caveat Lector-

http://www.startribune.com/stories/587/3647992.html
House, Senate agree to prohibit citizens' e-mail surveillance

Adam Clymer

New York Times



Published Feb. 12, 2003
PENT12

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- House and Senate negotiators have agreed that a
Pentagon project intended to detect terrorists by monitoring e-mail and
commercial databases for health, financial and travel information cannot
be used against Americans.

The conferees also agreed to restrict further research on the program
without extensive consultation with Congress.

House leaders agreed with Senate fears about the threat to personal
privacy posed by the Pentagon program, known as Total Information
Awareness (TIA). So they accepted a Senate provision in the omnibus
spending bill passed last month, said Rep. Jerry Lewis, R-Calif., who heads
the defense appropriations subcommittee.

Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., senior Democrat on the subcommittee, said of
the program, Jerry's against it, and I'm against it, so we kept the Senate
amendment. Of the Pentagon, he said, They've got some crazy people
over there.

The only obstacles to the provision becoming law would be the failure of
the conferees to reach agreement on the overall spending bill in which it
is included, or a successful veto of the bill by President Bush.

Lt. Cmdr. Donald Sewell, a Pentagon spokesman, defended the program,
saying, The Department of Defense still feels that it's a tool that can be
used to alert us to terrorist acts before they occur. He added, It's not a
program that snoops into American citizens' privacy.

One important factor in the breadth of the opposition is the fact that the
project is headed by retired Adm. John Poindexter. Several members of
Congress have said he is an unwelcome symbol because he was convicted
of lying to Congress when he was President Ronald Reagan's national
security adviser. That his conviction was reversed on the grounds that he
had been given immunity for the testimony in which he lied did not
mitigate congressional opinion, they said.

The conferees' decision spells almost complete failure for a last- minute
Pentagon effort, begun Friday, to protect TIA by establishing advisory
committees to oversee it.

TIA would enable a team of intelligence analysts to gather and view
information from databases, pursue links between individuals and groups,
respond to automatic alerts, and share information, all from their individual
computers.

It could link such different electronic sources as video feeds from airport
surveillance cameras, credit card transactions, airline reservations and
records of telephone calls. The data would be filtered through software
that would constantly seek suspicious patterns.

The program could be employed in support of lawful military operations
outside the United States and lawful foreign intelligence operations
conducted against non-U.S. citizens.

The action was praised by Democrats and Republicans and by outside
groups on both the political right and left.



Return to top

© Copyright 2003 Star Tribune. All rights reserved.
Forwarded for your information.  The text and intent of the article
have to stand on their own merits.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do
not believe simply because it has been handed down for many genera-
tions.  Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and
rumoured by many.  Do not believe in anything simply because it is
written in Holy Scriptures.  Do not believe in anything merely on
the authority of teachers, elders or wise men.  Believe only after
careful observation and analysis, when you find that it agrees with
reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all.
Then accept it and live up to it. The Buddha on Belief,
from the Kalama Sut

A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A
DECLARATION  DISCLAIMER
==
CTRL is a discussion  informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.

Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of
[EMAIL 

[CTRL] Leona Helmsley tax code

[Euphorian]

-Caveat Lector-

World Socialist Web Site www.wsws.org

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/feb2003/budg-f12.shtml


WSWS : News  Analysis : North America

Welfare for the wealthy: the Bush tax plan

Part two of five articles on Bush’s 2004 budget proposal

By Patrick Martin
12 February 2003

Back to screen version| Send this link by email | Email the author

This is the second in a series of articles on the social implications and
political significance of the Bush administration’s fiscal 2004 budget plan.
Part one, “The Bush budget: blueprint for a right- wing assault on the
working class”, was posted on February 11. Over the next three days, the
WSWS will publish detailed analyses of the budget’s impact on programs
benefiting the poor, its implications for the federal Medicare and Medicaid
health insurance programs, and its consequences for public education.

The centerpiece of the Bush administration’s budget is its $670 billion tax
cut, largely targeted to the wealthy. The outlines of the plan were
announced last month, in the week leading up to Bush’s State of the
Union speech. Since then, as the details have been fleshed out and the
proposal subjected to more careful analysis, the staggering dimensions of
the plan and its reactionary social implications have become more clear.

While there are a few provisions in the tax package that spread benefits
more widely, such as the increase in the child tax credit to $1,000, the
bulk of the tax cut is narrowly focused on the wealthiest Americans. Of
the total of $670 billion in cuts, $364 billion, more than half, arises from the
elimination of taxation on most corporate dividends.

The tens of millions of working and middle-class people with 401(k) plans
gain nothing from the measure, because the dividends paid for shares held
by the plans’ mutual funds are already tax-free. The entire gain from this
measure will be reaped by those who individually own large blocks of
stock—the top 1 percent of American society.

Another $236 billion in the Bush plan comes from accelerating the tax cuts
that were adopted in 2001 and scheduled to be phased in gradually over
the next seven years. These include cuts in income tax rates and
inheritance taxes that, again, largely benefit the rich.

The actual cost of this second round of Bush tax cuts is likely to be far
higher than the government’s $670 billion figure. According to an analysis
by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the tax cuts announced,
proposed or envisioned by the Bush administration will cost $2.3 trillion in
federal revenues over the next 10 years.

This includes $670 billion for the newly proposed cuts; $635 billion to make
the cuts passed in 2001 permanent, rather than allowing them to expire as
scheduled in 2010; $575 billion for relief of the Adjusted Minimum Tax,
which currently affects only high-income taxpayers but would begin to hit
large sections of the middle class within a decade; and $415 billion in
interest costs due to the increased federal borrowing required to pay for
the tax cuts.

When added to the $1.9 trillion cost of the 2001 tax cuts, the
administration’s plan amounts to a shift of $4.2 trillion in resources, the
lion’s share going to the richest fraction of the American population. This
is a wealth transfer without precedent in history.

Even a plundering of the public treasury on this scale is not enough to
satisfy the most rapacious elements of the ruling elite. Unexpectedly, and
with no prior discussion with either congressional Republicans or the
media, the Treasury Department released a proposal in late January to
revamp the present structure of tax-sheltered savings plans, replacing
existing 401(k) accounts and IRAs with three new types of accounts. These
would greatly increase the amount of income that the wealthy could
shield from any taxation.

The new proposals would allow a family of four to save up to $45,000 a year
in investment accounts that would earn tax-free interest and capital gains,
plus an additional $30,000 a year in employer matching accounts after 2006.
This benefit would mean nothing for the vast majority of working people
who live from paycheck to paycheck, spending all they earn. But it would
be a huge bonanza for those—primarily the top 1 or 2 percent of US
families—who have significant disposable income to save and invest.

A Treasury document acknowledges that “one-third of all Americans have
no assets available for investment, and another fifth have only negligible
assets.” In other words, over half the population could not invest a penny
in such tax-free accounts.

The actual market is even narrower: according to one study, less than 5
percent of Americans make full use of current IRAs and 401(k) accounts,
which are limited to $3,000 and $12,000 a year respectively. Even fewer
would be able to utilize the $45,000 a year savings plan proposed by the
Bush administration.

The new plan has two purposes, one short-run, the other more
fundamental. 

Re: [CTRL] [U-S-A] The Stench of the God of U-S-A (fwd)

[Ed Raymond]

-Caveat Lector-

It's great to live in the outside and criticize...
I'm very sure that the great Canada would never never ask for help from
such terrible country as the U.S.A. if they had a terrorist attack of the
magnitude of N.Y..

By the way, weren't the U.S and Canada started about the same time? Why
aren't you the brave leaders..slackers...


Party of Citizens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

-Caveat Lector-

-- Forwarded message --
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 10:13:31 -0800 (PST)
From: Party of Citizens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [U-S-A] The Stench of the God of U-S-A

 * http://www.geocities.com/partyofcitizens **

-- Forwarded message --
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 10:01:38 -0700
From: RADICAL PRESS [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: RADICAL PRESS [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [INGRAM] FW: [Fwd: Smells Like Guts  Glory ::: Poetry Against the
War]

This is an excellent collection. Do try to sign the petition found amongst
the poems below. Peace  Love, Arthur
***

From: Imaginal Diffusion Agency [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Organization: Planet 3 SolarPort
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 00:33:55 -1000
To: PoetryTV [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Smells Like Guts  Glory ::: Poetry Against the War

A Collection of Poems Burning Bright

Please Pass them into the Light!



God bless America

Here they go again,
The Yanks in their armoured parade
Chanting their ballads of joy
As they gallop across the big world
Praising America's God.

The gutters are clogged with the dead
The ones who couldn't join in
The others refusing to sing
The ones who are losing their voice
The ones who've forgotten the tune.

The riders have whips which cut.
Your head rolls onto the sand
Your head is a pool in the dirt
Your head is a stain in the dust
Your eyes have gone out and your nose
Sniffs only the pong of the dead
And all the dead air is alive
With the smell of America's God.

Harold Pinter 2003



State of the Union, 2003

I have not been to Jerusalem,
but Shirley talks about the bombs.
I have no god, but have seen the children praying
for it to stop. They pray to different gods.
The news is all old news again, repeated
like a bad habit, cheap tobacco, the social lie.

The children have seen so much death
that death means nothing to them now.
They wait in line for bread.
They wait in line for water.
Their eyes are black moons reflecting emptiness.
We've seen them a thousand times.

Soon, the President will speak.
He will have something to say about bombs
and freedom and our way of life.
I will turn the tv off. I always do.
Because I can't bear to look
at the monuments in his eyes.

--Sam Hamill



®¢§®¢§®¢§®¢§®¢§®¢§®¢§®¢§®¢§®¢§®



Refugee

***

She sits outside, on a stool, her face closed

And still with the hopelessness of tomorrow,

Drawn with remembered anguish

As this day, empty of hope like all the days

Since she arrived, draws to its end.

The setting sun gleams, reflected from the tin

Bowl on her lap, half filled with rice.

Slowly two tears from her closed eyes

Move down her cheeks. They glisten

In the end of the day's sun. She does not eat.

What horrors, I wonder, has she seen?

Forced from her home, she and her family,

Fleeing from terror I can only guess at,

Bearing it with her yet as she sits there,

Motionless, a vehicle for grief.

Her suffering is outside my knowledge:

I have never beeen torn, like she, from

Living roots, herded, as cattle are herded,

By those who deal in numbers, not faces.

For they are good, the people of the camp--

They would break if they began to notice the faces.

All around her are alien people:

Alien voices speaking from an inknown

Culture with words she cannot understand.

Only the sun and moon and the stars in the night sky

Are the same-- they were there yesterday. And God?

A child approaches. He is about ten, and thin.

He looks up at her closed face, and into the bowl

She holds in her still hands. She opens eyes that

Are dark with the pain fo yesterday. But tomorrow--

Tomorrow is for the child. She gives him the rice

And he eats.

His eyes, refelecting the sun's last rays,

Smolder with dreams. Tomorrow he will be a man.

Vengeance is Mine: I will repay saith the Lord.

But the child does not hear God-- his heart is full

With hatred. It is he-- he who will repay.

This is his dream for tomorrow.

Reason for Hope

Jane Goodall

http://www.janegoodall.org



®¢§®¢§®¢§®¢§®¢§®¢§®¢§®¢§®¢§®¢§®



Buying a Body Bag for the Future



I feel us being pulled backward in time

one of those dreams where no matter how

you try to escape you can't get ahead of it

running up the down escalator from some hell



All the centuries of struggle for our humanity

being pulled out from under us in an idiot's blink

while war machines drone overhead and flags

millions of flags hiding the grimy grey sky



A record repeating and each time more loudly

the emperor's 

[CTRL] Lincoln's Liberators

[Euphorian]

-Caveat Lector-

http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo40.html
How Lincoln’s Army 'Liberated' the Indians

by Thomas J. DiLorenzo

In a recent issue of The American Enterprise magazine devoted to the War
between the States (see my LRC article, AEI is Still Fighting the Civil War)
Victor Hanson, a visiting professor at the U.S. Naval Academy, defends and
makes excuses for Lincoln’s intentional waging of war on Southern
civilians. This included the bombing, pillaging and plundering of their cities
and towns, the burning of their homes, total destruction of farms and
livestock, gang rape, and the killing of thousands, including women and
children of all races. (See Merchant of Terror: General Sherman and Total
War by John Bennett Walters or The Hard Hand of War by Mark Grimsley).

It was all justified, says Hanson, because General Sherman and his men
were supposedly motivated by the belief that it was necessary to
guarantee the American proposition that each man is as good as another.
Sherman’s bummers, as they were called, were political avenging angels
who were offended by racial inequalities in the South. They were driven
by an ideological furor, to destroy the nature of Southern aristocracy.
The tyrannical Southern ruling class needed to be taught a lesson.
(Besides, he writes, rapes during [Sherman’s] march were almost
unknown).

In reality, neither Sherman nor his soldiers believed any of these things.
(And rapes were not as unknown to the Southern people as they are to
Hanson). In the Northern states at the time, myriad Black Codes existed
that prohibited blacks from migrating into most Northern states and kept
them from entering into contracts, voting, marrying whites, testifying in
court against whites (which invited criminal abuse), or sending their
children to public schools. They were excluded altogether from all forms
of transportation or required to sit in special Jim Crow sections. They
were prohibited from entering hotels, restaurants or resorts except as
servants, and were segregated in churches, prisons, and even cemeteries.
Free blacks in the North in the 1860s were cruelly discriminated against in
every aspect of their existence, and were denied the most fundamental of
citizenship rights

Sherman himself certainly did not believe that each man is as good as
another. For example, in 1862 Sherman was bothered that the country
was swarming with dishonest Jews (see Michael Fellman, Citizen Sherman,
p. 153). He got his close friend, General Grant, to expel all Jews from his
army. As Fellman writes, On December 17, 1862, Grant . . . , like a medieval
monarch . . . expelled ‘The Jews, as a class,’ from his department.
Sherman biographer Fellman further writes that to Sherman, the Jews
were like niggers and like greasers (Mexicans) or Indians in that they
were classes or races permanently inferior to his own.

The notion that Sherman’s army was motivated by a belief that all men are
created equal is belied by the further fact that just three months after
General Robert E. Lee surrendered at Appomattox the very same army
commenced a campaign of ethnic genocide against the Plains Indians. In
July of 1865 Sherman was put in charge of the Military District of the
Missouri (all land west of the Mississippi) and given the assignment to
eradicate the Plains Indians in order to make way for the federally
subsidized transcontinental railroad. Like Lincoln, Sherman was a friend of
Grenville Dodge, the chief engineer of the project. He was also a railroad
investor and he lobbied his brother, Senator John Sherman, to allocate
federal funds for the transcontinental railroad. We are not going to let a
few thieving, ragged Indians stop and check the progress of the railroad,
he wrote to General Grant in 1867 (Fellman, p. 264). As Fellman writes:

[T]he great triumvirate of the Union Civil War effort [Grant, Sherman and
Sheridan] formulated and enacted military Indian policy until reaching, by
The 1880s, what Sherman sometimes referred to as the final solution of
the Indian problem, which he defined as killing hostile Indians and
segregating their pauperized survivors in remote places . . . . These men
applied their shared ruthlessness, born of their Civil War experiences,
against a people all three despised, in the name of Civilization and Progress
(emphasis added).

Another Sherman biographer, John F. Marszalek, points out in Sherman: A
Soldier’s Passion for Order, that Sherman viewed Indians as he viewed
recalcitrant Southerners during the war and newly freed people after the
war: resisters to the legitimate forces of an orderly society, by which he
meant the central government. Moreover, writes Marszalek, Sherman’s
philosophy was that since the inferior Indians refused to step aside so
superior American culture could create success and progress, they had to
be driven out of the way as the Confederates had been driven back into
the Union.

Most of the other generals who took a direct role in the 

[CTRL] DiMaggio died convinced

[Euphorian]

-Caveat Lector-

http://www.thescotsman.co.uk/international.cfm?id=167402003

Tue 11 Feb 2003

email article

Joe DiMaggio died convinced JFK had Monroe killed

ANNETTE WITHERIDGE IN NEW YORK

HE WAS only married to Marilyn Monroe for nine turbulent months, but
Joe

DiMaggio, the reclusive US baseball legend, vowed he would never forgive
the Kennedys for her death.

Now, four years after his own demise, the man immortalised by Simon and
Garfunkel in the song Mrs Robinson appears to have his revenge.

A new book, written by his long-time lawyer and close companion Morris
Engelberg, reveals he really did believe the Kennedy clan killed Monroe.

They murdered the one person I loved, DiMaggio confided to Mr
Engelberg.

Officially, Monroe, who allegedly enjoyed affairs with both John Kennedy,
the US president, and his attorney general brother, Robert, committed
suicide with an overdose of sleeping pills in 1962.

But rumours she was killed by the Kennedys because she knew too much
about the political dynasty’s Mafia links and was threatening to go public
to get back at Robert for dumping her have persisted ever since.

DiMaggio, who organised Monroe’s funeral and, for the next 20 years, had
white roses delivered to her grave twice a week, refused to talk publicly
about what he thought happened. However, he appears to have
sanctioned his memoirs to come out after his death.

The Yankee Clipper, as he was known, claims to have read the Hollywood
star’s diary after her death.

Monroe’s journal disappeared shortly afterwards but, according to the
book DiMaggio: Setting the Record Straight, the star of The Seven Year
Itch had apparently noted her conversations with Robert Kennedy about
CIA plans to poison Fidel Castro with the aid of the Chicago gangster Sam
Giancana, and the government’s investigation into union leader Jimmy
Hoffa’s Mafia links.

Monroe met the Kennedys through Peter Lawford, their British brother-in-
law, and is believed to have passed on Robert’s pillow talk to Frank Sinatra,
who in turn reported to Giancana.

Engelberg and co-author Marv Schneider tell how Monroe spoke to
DiMaggio’s son, Joe Jnr, on the night she died saying she wanted to set
the record straight.

She said she spoke with RFK [Robert Kennedy] three or four times a week
and he told her about the work he was doing, the book reveals. He
mentioned which mobsters they were going after. Marilyn would pass on
some of those tidbits to Sinatra, according to Joe Jnr.

DiMaggio shed no tears when the Kennedys were assassinated. According
to the book, which contains a foreword by Henry Kissinger, DiMaggio
believed they got what they deserved.

DiMaggio, who was 84 when he died after a long battle with cancer,
refused to shake Robert Kennedy’s hand when they met at New York’s
Yankee Stadium. Just a few years before he died he agreed to go to the
Kennedy Centre only if no member of the extended political family was
there.

When Engelberg asked him why, DiMaggio responded: What they did to me
will never be forgotten.

DiMaggio was considered to be one of the greatest baseball players, but
he hated the limelight and sports fans were stunned when he suddenly
married Monroe in 1954. He was 39 and already retired, she was 27 and at
the height of her fame.

They spent their honeymoon in Japan, where 100,000 US troops turned
out to meet them. Afterwards, Monroe commented: I have never heard so
much cheering. DiMaggio replied knowingly: I have.

Few were surprised when the couple split within nine months. He moved
to Hollywood, Florida, and in later years, became estranged from his only
son, Joe Jnr, and other family members.

Engelberg, his next door neighbour, came under attack in the months
before the player’s death for appearing to control every aspect of
DiMaggio’s life.












International


War plans in chaos as


NATO splits


Bomb blast shocks Enniskillen


Chirac walks a tightrope over war with Iraq


Sinn Fein leaders ordered to court


Joe DiMaggio died convinced JFK had Monroe killed


Experts fear Iranian nuclear plans


Pointless rebellion has taken NATO to the brink


US media goes on the attack


Threat to Germany's coalition as Schröder and Fischer talk tough


England's cricketers refuse to play in Zimbabwe


International digest


Air India bomb admission


TV show will offer the chance to win $1 billion



IRAQ CONFLICT MAP


click to launch



TRAVEL GUIDE



Part 2 of our guide looks at


long-haul destinations direct from Scotland




ZIMBABWE






PHOTO GALLERY


Browse our award-winning


photos and buy online.



 ©2003 scotsman.com
Forwarded for your information.  The text and intent of the article
have to stand on their own merits.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

Do not 

[CTRL] Cold War-era garrisons

[Euphorian]

-Caveat Lector-

  Print this article |   Close this window
Pentagon plans NATO blitz on Germany by pulling out
By David Rennie in Washington
February 12 2003

The Pentagon is drawing up plans to pull thousands of American troops out
of bases in Germany, replacing Cold War-era garrisons with lightly manned
bases scattered across eastern Europe.

The plans predate the row over Iraq, but their leaking to the media on
Monday will be taken as another signal to the German Government that
American attitudes towards Europe are changing.

Although no decision has been taken, the plan to scale down the United
States military presence in Germany, the mainstay of US forces in Europe
since World War II, marks a strategic shift welcomed by the insecure post-
communist countries of central Europe.

The plans were outlined to senators by the new NATO supreme
commander, General James Jones.

In the words of one US diplomat, the policy discussion is not punishment
for German obstructionism, but its timing is certainly opportune, wrote
William Safire, a commentator for The New York Times.

General Jones told senators attending a security conference in Munich
that the 70,000 US troops
garrisoned in Germany, with 70,000 dependants, were an unwieldy,
expensive relic of the past.

The momentum for moving out of Germany is being increased by the US-
German estrangement. Last month, the Pentagon ordered all non-essential
investment in the sprawling US bases in Germany to be frozen, according
to the

German Christian Democrat MP Michael Billen, whose

constituency in south-west Germany includes US air bases that over the
past 50 years have grown into large American communities.

Polish newspapers reported recently from Washington that the US was to
shift bases from Germany to Poland, the biggest and most important new
NATO member, the most pro-American, and one of the key countries in
what Mr Rumsfeld calls new Europe.

The Polish reports were denied in Washington, but when he was asked
about the issue in Rome last week, Mr Rumsfeld said: We are reviewing
our bases ... the centre of gravity is shifting in the [NATO] alliance. The
interest and the enthusiasm that the countries that had lived under
repressive regimes previously is a good thing for NATO.

General Jones told senior US congressmen and senators in Brussels last
Friday that the large US garrisons in Germany could be radically
transformed by the need for more flexible and mobile rapid response
structures that may halve the number of US troops required in Germany
and lead to new bases being opened from Poland to Romania, according to
US press reports on Sunday.

In contrast to those of western Europe, the governments of eastern
Europe are queuing up to offer military assets, resources and staff for the
US war effort against Iraq.

Romania and Bulgaria are the latest governments to make bases available to
the US air force. The first US aircraft are expected in Bulgaria on Monday.

The Telegraph, London; The Guardian

This story was found at:
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/02/11/1044927598982.html
Forwarded for your information.  The text and intent of the article
have to stand on their own merits.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do
not believe simply because it has been handed down for many genera-
tions.  Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and
rumoured by many.  Do not believe in anything simply because it is
written in Holy Scriptures.  Do not believe in anything merely on
the authority of teachers, elders or wise men.  Believe only after
careful observation and analysis, when you find that it agrees with
reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all.
Then accept it and live up to it. The Buddha on Belief,
from the Kalama Sut

A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A
DECLARATION  DISCLAIMER
==
CTRL is a discussion  informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.

Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of
[EMAIL 

[CTRL] *A* Version of the UbL Transcript

[Euphorian]

-Caveat Lector-

  Print this article |   Close this window
Transcript of Osama bin Laden tape

February 12 2003

Translation of the purported Osama bin Laden tape broadcast on al-
Jazeera.

In the name of Allah, the Merciful, the Beneficent: A Message to our
Muslim brothers in Iraq. Alsalam Alikom Wa Rahmat Allah wa Barakato.
(Koran verse) Oh Believers, be pious to God, and never die but when you
are believers in Islam.

We are following with utmost concern the Crusaders' preparations to
occupy the former capital of Islam (Baghdad), loot the fortunes of the
Muslims and install a puppet regime on you that follows its masters in
Washington and Tel Aviv like the rest of the treacherous puppet Arab
governments as a prelude to the formation of Greater Israel.

We need to reassure - while we are close to the unjust war, the war of
the bawds, America is leading with its allies and agents - on a number of
important lessons:

First, to be honest in intention that the fighting would be for the sake of
God, not to triumph for nationalism or pagan regimes in all the Arab
countries, including Iraq. God said in his book, 'Those who are the
believers fight for the sake of God. Those who are infidels fight for the
sake of the juggernaut. Fight the followers of the devil. The devil's cause is
weak'.

Second, remember that victory comes only from God. We have to exert all
efforts with preparations,
stimulation and jihad. God said, 'O believers, if you fight for the sake of
God, God will grant you victory and make your standing firm'. Therefore,
you are obligated to hurry up to ask for God's forgiveness from all sins,
especially the great ones. The Prophet said, 'Avoid falling in the seven
great sins, which are: believing in any but God, magic, murder, usury,
stealing orphans' money, fleeing from battle, slandering believing women ...
besides, drinking alcohol, adultery, not obeying the parents and false
testimony'. You should be obedient in general.

Third, we recognised after fighting and defending ourselves from the
American enemy that it depends on its fighting mainly in psychological war
for the huge propaganda machine it has, and it also depends on the heavy
air bombing. America uses these two in order to hide its soldiers'
weaknesses, which are fear, cowardice, and lack of fighting spirit. These
soldiers are totally convinced in their unjust cause and their unjust lying
government. They also lack a just cause to fight for its sake.

They are fighting only to serve the interest of those who have the capital,
arms dealers, oil owners, including the criminal gang in the White House.
Adding to that, those who keep their personal envoys, Bush the father.

We have recognised that one of the best, effective, and available means to
devoid the aerial force of the crusading enemy of its content is by digging
large numbers of trenches and camouflaging them in huge numbers, as I
previously referred to in my past talk of the Tora Bora battle last year.
Such a great battle where the faithful achieved victory over all material
forces. We did that by holding firm our principles, and with God's help.

I will recall one part of such a great battle to prove how much they
(American soldiers) are cowards, in one side, and how effective are these
trenches in depleting them from another side. We were 300 mujahideen
(holy fighters). We were digging 100 ditches spread over an area of one
mile only. The range is one ditch for every three brothers. To avoid grave
human losses during the air bombing as our centres were exposed - in the
first hour of the American warfare in October 7, 2001 - to a heavy
concentrated shelling, which then turned sporadic during the middle of
Ramadan. Then on Ramadan 17, the shelling turned to a very heavy one,
especially after the American command was certain that some of al-Qaeda
leaders are in Tora Bora, including the poor slave (talking about himself)
and the holy fighter doctor Ayman el-Zawahri.

The bombing lasted 24 hours a day. No second passed without aircrafts
passing over our heads day and night, as the headquarters in US Defence
Ministry with all other allies had nothing to do but to bomb and destroy
that tiny spot and clear it from existence. The aircrafts were spilling
bombs over us, especially after it finished its main mission in Afghanistan.

The American forces were bombing us with smart bombs, cluster bombs,
and bombs which invade caves. B-52 aircraft were flying every two hours
over our heads and throwing each time, 20 to 30 bombs. The modified
Sinmo 13 aircrafts were bombing us daily with new bombs. Despite such a
heavy shelling with the horrible propaganda, the first of its kind, on such a
small zone surrounded from all sides, in addition to the forces of the
hypocrites which were pushed to fight us for a continual half a month,
which we faced their daily waves, despite all that, they (American soldiers)
turned back carrying their killed and injured soldiers. The American troops
couldn't dare 

[CTRL] Fugitive from Justice to Be New Iraqi Leader?

[Euphorian]

-Caveat Lector-

Wednesday 12 February 2003
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?
xml=/news/2003/02/12/wirq12.xml/

US names its choice to succeed

Saddam
By Toby Harnden in Washington
(Filed: 12/02/2003)

America is planning to install the leader of a
London-based opposition group, the Iraqi National Congress, as the interim
president of Iraq once Saddam Hussein is toppled.

Ahmad Chalabi, 57, a Shi'ite exile who fled Iraq with his family when he was
12 and attended a British boarding school, is currently in Kurdish-
controlled northern Iraq and may remain there until an invasion begins.

It's pretty clear it's going to be Chalabi, [barring] some dramatic
development during the war, a senior Bush administration official told The
Telegraph.

We will try to get him and the other opposition leaders back into Baghdad
as quickly as possible and set up an interim authority that can pick up the
pieces of government.

But he added that no final decision on Mr Chalabi had been made
because it would be a mistake to reach any firm conclusions before the
military stage is over.

Once military victory was achieved, the official said, Gen Tommy Franks
would be the de facto ruler of the country.

However, the Bush administration has decided that a leader in the mould
of Gen Douglas MacArthur would only heighten accusations of American
imperialism.

The current plan would be for Mr Chalabi to take over from Gen Franks
once a conference of Iraqi opposition leaders could be convened inside
the country. A principal American goal would be to hand Iraq over to a
democratic government as swiftly as feasible so that US forces could
withdraw.

The more visible we are and the longer our presence is, the more of a
target we present, the official said. We want to give the country back to
the Iraqis and let them take responsibility for the country. One thing we
can do is to [try to] stop Saddam torching Iraq's oilfields. If he does, we'll
have to try to put the fires out and do something to secure the oilfields
again. We will also secure the outer perimeter of the country.

We plan to find and destroy the weapons of mass destruction. We will do
that and not the United Nations. We sure as hell are not going to ask Hans
Blix [the chief UN weapons inspector] to do it.

Although the Iraqi people would elect their new president, occupying the
interim post would probably make Mr Chalabi the clear favourite. Hamid
Karzai, the interim president of Afghanistan, was subsequently confirmed
as the country's leader. Mr Chalabi has the firm backing of the Pentagon's
civilian leadership and Vice President Dick Cheney's office but senior
figures in the State Department have argued against him.

One school of thought was that people in Iraq would resent someone
from outside, said the official. Mr Chalabi was educated at Seaford College
in Sussex and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and took a PhD in
maths at the University of Chicago.

State Department desk officers have described Mr Chalabi as corrupt,
citing his 1992 conviction in absentia in Jordan for embezzlement and
theft. Mr Chalabi, who has survived at least nine assassination attempts,
says he was framed after his Petra Bank, the third largest in Jordan,
collapsed.

The official, who said the debate over whether to go to war is over,
stressed that Mr Chalabi would not be a puppet leader propped up by
America and that free democratic elections would take place in Iraq as
soon as practicable.

Iraq's relative wealth and educated middle-class made it in some ways
easier to rebuild than Afghanistan, the official said, but different ethnic
groups would have to be in the administration.


11 February 2003: Nato crisis won't delay war, says US

10 February 2003: Battle weary Iraqis shrug off threat of more conflict

18 December 2002: Divided factions agree 'government-in- waiting'

13 December 2002: Iraqi exiles meet in spirit of democracy

13 October 2002: Alarm in Europe at US plan for general to govern Iraq

12 October 2002: Liberated Iraq could be ruled by US general

14 June 2002: Karzai is voted Afghan president


Related reports




Leader: Baghdad reshuffle


Bin Laden rallies Iraq


Grannies gather in Baghdad


US recalls diplomatic staff


Iraq factfile



External links




Iraqi National Congress


The White House


Iraq - Foreign and Commonwealth Office


Oil and Iraq: opportunities and challenges [6 Feb '03] - Iraq Foundation


A material breach of the Constitution [11 Feb '03] - Counterpunch


Showdown with Saddam - CBS News







© Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited 2003.
Forwarded for your information.  The text and intent of the article
have to stand on their own merits.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

Do not 

[CTRL] Very Much Alive?

[Euphorian]

-Caveat Lector-

Misleading the Public
Osama Wants Saddam Dead
by Firas Al-Atraqchi
YellowTimes.org columnist
February 12, 2003

On Tuesday, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell dropped a bombshell at a
Congressional hearing on Iraq and revealed that he had a transcript of an
upcoming audio message from Osama bin Laden that betrays the links
between bin Laden and Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.

However, the White House may have put its foot in its mouth this time
around.

Upon careful scrutiny of the audio message from bin Laden (and broadcast
at 3pm EST on the Arabic News Network Al-Jazeerah), it appears the Bush
administration may have been so desperate to pin anything on Saddam and
bin Laden that they did not wait to actually hear the contents of the
message, nor provide adequate and reliable translation.

The bin Laden message expresses solidarity with the Iraqi people, advises
them to remain steadfast in the coming invasion of their country and
declares that Saddam and his aides are not important. It is not important
if Saddam and his government disappear, the man thought to be bin Laden
says. This is a war against you, the Muslims, and you must take arms to
defend yourselves.

U.S. officials were quick to point out that the bin Laden message directly
incriminates Iraq and proves the existence of ties between bin Laden's al-
Qaeda and Saddam. U.S. media touted the official line before even hearing
the tape, or awaiting a reliable translation. Undeniably links Iraq with al-
Qaeda, says one CNN anchor.

And then something happened that neither the U.S. administration nor the
media anticipated: bin Laden called Saddam an apostate.

The audio message goes on to reveal that bin Laden believes Saddam to be
a socialist and declares that socialists and communists are unbelievers,
thereby labeling Saddam an apostate of Islam, an infidel. It is worth
mentioning that the government of Iraq is quasi-socialist and secular, and
not Islamic.

Walid Phares, an Arabic-speaking MSNBC analyst finds that the audio
message undermines Saddam's regime: Osama bin Laden does not care
about Saddam, in fact he can't wait till the demise of Saddam; he is trying
to position himself to offer Iraqis an alternative ideology – he calls socialism
abhorrent to Islam.

The voice alleged to be bin Laden's in the audio message also called for
the spilling of Saddam's blood: His blood is halal. This wording is used to
indicate what is permissive or legally allowed for the killing of a usurper or
criminal.

The audio message also called forth the overthrow of governments
supporting the U.S. – Nigeria, Morocco, Jordan and Saudi Arabia.

If bin Laden is effectively calling on Muslim Iraqis to overthrow Saddam and
that Saddam is irrelevant in the coming war and Iraqis should not fight for
him, how then can the U.S. administration use this message to prove
Saddam and al-Qaeda are linked?

That question left some analysts baffled.

Kenneth Pollack, CNN analyst and anti-terrorism specialist, says that this is
not the first time that bin Laden has used the plight of Iraq under
sanctions and under Saddam to rally Muslims to his cause. In fact, bin
Laden has spoken of the Iraqi issue since 1996, and has not hidden the fact
that he is growing distaste for Saddam's socialist, Ba'athist regime.

The October audio message this year was a four minute tape and bin
Laden expressed sympathy for the Iraqi people, says Peter Bergen, CNN
consultant on terrorism. I don't see today's audio message as endorsing
Saddam, he concludes.

Nevertheless, U.S. officials maintain that this is all the proof they need.
However, the U.S. viewing public must be aware that they were only
allowed to view excerpts of the 16-minute audio message, and contrary to
what CNN has been proclaiming, it is not all about Iraq. The audio message
also includes advice on refraining from alcohol and illicit sex, and
respecting one's parents, in addition to other spiritual advice.

The audio message will not go down so easily in Europe and the Middle
East and will be seen as a desperate attempt by a U.S. administration that
has taken a bashing in NATO and at the U.N. to turn the tables around.

According to the BBC, BBC's security correspondent, Frank Gardner, said
the figure on the tape voiced support for Iraq, but that in no way did it
prove a link between al-Qaeda and the Iraqi leadership.

Arabic speakers are sure to pour scorn on the official U.S. line. U.S.
Congressional leaders, who have appeared on talk shows immediately
following the excerpted broadcast of the audio tape have alluded to
incorrect translations of the original Arabic content.

By default, the U.S. public is offered a half-censored, half-baked version of
the audio tape.

While U.S. officials have conceded that the voice on the tape is indeed
that of bin Laden, no one has bothered to focus on why the man U.S.
President Bush vowed to get dead or alive is very much alive and a clear
and present danger.

comments on this 

Re: [CTRL] Aussie Pol Tells US Ambassador To Back Off, Butt Out

[Prudy L]

-Caveat Lector-
In a message dated 2/11/2003 10:27:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


"Quite frankly, the ambassador is out of order," he said.

"He speaks on behalf of his government and he shouldn't be reflecting on the leadership of the ALP and it's my view that he should be recalled to Washington and counselled."


And this would be a good idea if there was anyone in Washington who was familiar enough with diplomacy to do so. Prudy
A HREF=""www.ctrl.org/A
DECLARATION  DISCLAIMER
==
CTRL is a discussion  informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.

Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 A HREF=""Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]/A

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 A HREF=""ctrl/A

To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

[CTRL] Texas Twist-A-Fate

[Euphorian]

-Caveat Lector-

Ah, yes, Tejas.  When I was down they-ah, I had young fellow working
for me who asked for a day off to go to his uncle's funeral.  Eventually the
discussion got around to exact-a-ly how Uncle came to be among the
unliving and it worked out this a-way:  Uncle had been out for a few drinks
on a particular evening and decided to go to I-HOP for breakfast.  As he
was sitting at the counter, sipping his coffee, stirring his hash browns into
his eggs, or just savouring a bite of toast, another fellow came into the
restaurant and unloaded his shootin' iron into Uncle (I forget how many
shots were fired -- enough to kill though).  After the shooter was
apprehended, they took him up to the Uncle for identification, at which
time the shooter informed the police that Uncle was the wrong guy.  Sorry
for Uncle but accidents do happen!  A:E:R 


TX: Whack’em  Stack’em –
Some Things More Important Than Terrorism
Report by J.J. Johnson
http://www.sierratimes.com/03/02/12/arst021203.htm
San Antonio – In case you’ve been in a fish bowl, we’re on a high-terror
alert. Everything is on a hair trigger, and there’s nothing more important
than keeping the American public free from harm, right? Well, it’s good to
know our benevolent federal agents are doing just that – being the
‘watchmen on the wall’. In fact, your federal government is working so
hard to protect us that they even found time – to shoot a 14 year old girl
in the head.

Here’s the story:

Drug Enforcement Administration officers were out doing surveillance
and/or trying to apprehend a suspect who, to them, was clearly a bigger
threat than Al Qaida. Actually, it was just some alledged drug dealer – but
you get the drift. Apparently, a 14-year old girl walked out with someone
else who “looked” like the guy they were looking for.

Remember, this is the DEA’s account of what happened – and you know
how trustworthy they are.

The federal agents said that when they tried to stop the pair, the girl
drove the car toward the agents. Officials said one agent fired two rounds
toward the car. When she tried to back up, agents said they fired two
more rounds at the car.

Let that be a lesson to you.

It’s the “drove toward the agents” thing – that’s all that is needed (or said)
to justify a person’s immediate execution these days. Then again, you’re in
a rough part of town, and you see plain clothed guys draw guns on you –
what would you do? Guess she didn’t hit reverse fast enough. But fear not
- as of time of this writing, the poor girl isn’t dead – she’s in critical
condition at a local hospital with a bullet in her head.

Some may say it’s her fault for hanging around drug dealers. After all,
that’ll make one feel better about the dangerous jobs these DEA agents
are doing. Ah, but you see, the man with the little girl was not the one
they were looking for. Hence, she was shot for nothing.

Not to worry, the local police said they are conducting an investigation,
and the DEA is cooperating. TRANSLATION: Give us a day or two to come
up with a reason why that little 14 year- old girl deserved what she got.

Meanwhile, the Terror Threat remains high as the federal government…




© 2003 SierraTimes.com
Forwarded for your information.  The text and intent of the article
have to stand on their own merits.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do
not believe simply because it has been handed down for many genera-
tions.  Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and
rumoured by many.  Do not believe in anything simply because it is
written in Holy Scriptures.  Do not believe in anything merely on
the authority of teachers, elders or wise men.  Believe only after
careful observation and analysis, when you find that it agrees with
reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all.
Then accept it and live up to it. The Buddha on Belief,
from the Kalama Sut

A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A
DECLARATION  DISCLAIMER
==
CTRL is a discussion  informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.

Archives Available at:

[CTRL] Getting Ready (Pt 1)

[Euphorian]

-Caveat Lector-

Preparing for War Part 1:
Disaster Supply Kits
By The Sierra Times
http://www.sierratimes.com/03/02/11/disaster1.htm
This is the first is a series of informational articles you'll be seeing at The
Sierra Times. We consider this a public service. Most of the information
here comes from various government publications, and other venues..
Hence, you probably won't see firearms mentioned - at first anyway. This is
just the basic stuff, folks. This is written for regular readers that never
thought to take steps to prepare for the worst. But the way the rhetoric
has been going out there, we may need this kind of information in short
order. Printing and saving strongly recommended.

BTW, this stuff is being mailed to every citizen in certain other countries
right now. Time to get serious, people.





You may need to survive on your own for three days or more. This means
having your own water, food and emergency supplies. Try using backpacks
or duffel bags to keep the supplies together.

Assembling the supplies you might need following a disaster is an important
part of your disaster plan. You should prepare emergency supplies for the
following situations:

o A disaster supply kit with essential food, water, and supplies for at least
three days-this kit should be kept in a designated place and be ready to
grab and go in case you have to leave your home quickly because of a
disaster, such as a flash flood or major chemical emergency. Make sure all
household members know where the kit is kept.

o Consider having additional supplies for sheltering or home confinement
for up to two weeks.

o You should also have a disaster supply kit at work. This should be in one
container, ready to grab and go in case you have to evacuate the
building.

o A car kit of emergency supplies, including food and water, to keep
stored in your car at all times. This kit would also include flares, jumper
cables, and seasonal supplies.

The following checklists will help you assemble disaster supply kits that
meet the needs of your household. The basic items that should be in a
disaster supply kit are water, food, first-aid supplies, tools and emergency
supplies, clothing and bedding, and specialty items. You will need to
change the stored water and food supplies every six months, so be sure to
write the date you store it on all containers. You should also re-think your
needs every year and update your kit as your household changes. Keep
items in airtight plastic bags and put your entire disaster supply kit in one
or two easy-to carry containers such as an unused trash can, camping
backpack or duffel bag.

Water: the absolute necessity

1. Stocking water reserves should be a top priority. Drinking water in
emergency situations should not be rationed. Therefore, it is critical to
store adequate amounts of water for your household.

o Individual needs vary, depending on age, physical condition, activity,
diet, and climate. A normally active person needs at least two quarts of
water daily just for drinking. Children, nursing mothers, and ill people need
more. Very hot temperatures can double the amount of water needed.

o Because you will also need water for sanitary purposes and, possibly, for
cooking, you should store at least one gallon of water per person per day.

2. Store water in thoroughly washed plastic, fiberglass or enamel-lined
metal containers. Don't use containers that can break, such as glass
bottles. Never use a container that has held toxic substances. Sound
plastic containers, such as soft drink bottles, are best. You can also
purchase food-grade plastic buckets or drums.

o Containers for water should be rinsed with a diluted bleach solution
(one part bleach to ten parts water) before use. Previously used bottles or
other containers may be contaminated with microbes or chemicals. Do not
rely on untested devices for decontaminating water.

o If your water is treated commercially by a water utility, you do not need
to treat water before storing it. Additional treatments of treated public
water will not increase storage life.

o If you have a well or public water that has not been treated, follow the
treatment instructions provided by your public health service or water
provider.

o If you suspect that your well may be contaminated, contact your local
or state health department or agriculture extension agent for specific
advice.

o Seal your water containers tightly, label them and store them in a cool,
dark place.

o It is important to change stored water every six months.
For water purification for immediate or near term use, please read the
Shelter chapter of this guide.

Food: preparing an emergency supply.

1. If activity is reduced, healthy people can survive on half their usual food
intake for an extended period or without any food for many days. Food,
unlike water, may be rationed safely, except for children and pregnant
women.

2. You don't need to go out and buy unfamiliar foods to prepare an

[CTRL] Torture

[Steve Wilson]

-Caveat Lector-


http://www.angelfire.com/nj3/soundweapon/


A HREF=""www.ctrl.org/A
DECLARATION  DISCLAIMER
==
CTRL is a discussion  informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.

Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 A HREF=""Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]/A

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 A HREF=""ctrl/A

To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

[CTRL] How The honorable president may help victims of torture

[Steve Wilson]

-Caveat Lector-

Section 802 of the first Patriot Act. (Section
802 is the new definition of domestic terrorism, and the definition is
“any action that endangers human life that is a violation of any Federal
or State law.”) 
http://www.angelfire.com/nj3/soundweapon/
the guys doing the above can be locked up!
ho-ray for the Commander in Chief
A HREF=""www.ctrl.org/A
DECLARATION  DISCLAIMER
==
CTRL is a discussion  informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.

Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 A HREF=""Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]/A

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 A HREF=""ctrl/A

To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

[CTRL] Fw: National Guard And Reserve Mobilized As Of February 12, 2003

[Jim Rarey]

-Caveat Lector-




- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 8:15 AM
Subject: National Guard And Reserve Mobilized As Of February 12,
2003
NEWS RELEASE from the United States Department of
DefenseNo. 070-03(703)697-5131(media)IMMEDIATE
RELEASEFebruary 12, 2003(703) 428-0711(public/industry)NATIONAL
GUARD AND RESERVE MOBILIZED AS OF FEBRUARY 12, 2003This week the Army, Navy,
Air Force, and Marine Corps eachannounce an increase of reservists on active
duty in support ofthe partial mobilization. The net collective result
is 38,649more reservists than last week.The total number of reserve
personnel currently on active dutyin support of the partial mobilization for
the Army NationalGuard and Army Reserve is 113,751; Naval Reserve, 6,276;
AirNational Guard and Air Force Reserve, 15,704; Marine CorpsReserve,
12,539; and the Coast Guard Reserve, 1,982. Thisbrings the total
Reserve and National Guard on active duty to150,252 including both units and
individual augmentees.At any given time, services may mobilize some
units andindividuals while demobilizing others, making it possible
forthese figures to either increase or decrease.A cumulative roster
of all National Guard and Reserve who arecurrently on active duty can be
foundhttp://www.defenselink.mil/news/Feb2003/d20030212ngr.pdf.[Web
version: http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Feb2003/b02122003_bt070-03.html]--
News Releases: http://www.defenselink.mil/news/releases.html--
DoD News: http://www.defenselink.mil/news/dodnews.html--
Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://www.defenselink.mil/news/dodnews.html#e-mail--
Today in DoD: http://www.defenselink.mil/today
A HREF=""www.ctrl.org/A
DECLARATION  DISCLAIMER
==
CTRL is a discussion  informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.

Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 A HREF=""Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]/A

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 A HREF=""ctrl/A

To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

[CTRL] Get Ready, Set (Pt 2)

[Euphorian]

-Caveat Lector-

Preparing for War Part II - Sheltering
By The Sierra Times
http://www.sierratimes.com/03/02/12/arjj3_021203.htm
It should be made clear that as this information comes from various
government documents, you'll see the word authorities used often. Here
at the News Ranch, you can replace the word authorities with person or
people on hand having the greatest amount of firepower. As you will see
in what you read below, government or authorities, will probably be far,
far way from you in most cases.

Taking shelter is often a critical element in protecting yourself and your
household in times of disaster. Sheltering can take several forms. In- place
sheltering is appropriate when conditions require that you seek
protection in your home, place of employment, or wherever you are
located when disaster strikes. In-place sheltering may either be short-
term, such as going to a safe room for a fairly short period while a tornado
warning is in effect or while a chemical cloud passes. It may also be longer-
term, as when you stay in your home for several days without electricity
or water services following a winter storm.

We also use the term shelter for Mass Care facilities that provide a place
to stay, along with food and water, to people who evacuate before or
following a disaster. The appropriate steps to take in preparing for and
implementing short-term in-place sheltering depends entirely on the
emergency situation. For instance, during a tornado warning you should go
to an underground room, if such a room is available. During a chemical
release, on the other hand, you should seek shelter in a room above
ground level. Because of these differences, short-term in-place shelter is
described in the chapters dealing with specific hazards. This chapter
describes steps you should take to prepare for long-term in-place
sheltering and for staying in a mass care shelter if you evacuate.

Long-term in-place sheltering.

Sometimes disasters make it unsafe for people to leave their residence for
extended periods. Winter storms, floods, and landslides may isolate
individual households and make it necessary for each household to take
care of its own needs until the disaster abates, such as when snows melt
and temperatures rise, or until rescue workers arrive. Your household
should be prepared to be self-sufficient for three days when cut off from
utilities and from outside supplies of food and water.

1. Stay in your shelter until local authorities say it's okay to leave. The
length of your stay can range from a few hours to two weeks. 2. Maintain a
24-hour communications and safety watch. Take turns listening for radio
broadcasts. Take note of the 50,000 watt clear-channel stations. These are
the AM stations from far away that you can hear at night. .
3. Assemble an emergency toilet, if necessary. . Use a garbage container,
pail or bucket with a snug-fitting cover. If the container is small, use a
larger container with a cover for waste disposal. Line both containers with
plastic bags. . After each use, pour or sprinkle a small amount of regular
household disinfectant, such as chlorine bleach, into the container to
reduce odors and germs. Or - dig a hole, sit between two logs. Use a fresh
leaves to wipe, bury when done.

Managing water supplies

Water is critical for survival. Plan to have about one gallon of water per
person per day for drinking, cooking and personal hygiene. You may need
more for medical emergencies. 1. Allow people to drink according to their
need. The average person should drink between two and two-and-one-half
quarts of water or other liquids per day, but many people need more. This
will depend on age, physical activity, physical condition and time of year.
2. Never ration water unless ordered to do so by authorities. Drink the
amount you need today and try to find more for tomorrow. Under no
circumstances should a person drink less than one quart of water each
day. You can minimize the amount of water your body needs by reducing
activity and staying cool.
3. Drink water that you know is not contaminated first. If necessary,
suspicious water, such as cloudy water from regular faucets or muddy
water from streams or ponds, can be used after it has been treated. If
water treatment is not possible, put off drinking suspicious water as long
as possible, but do not become dehydrated.
4. In addition to stored water, other sources include: . Melted ice cubes.
. Water drained from the water heater faucet, if the water heater has not
been damaged. . Water dipped from the flush tanks (not the bowls) of
home toilets. Bowl water can be used for pets. . Liquids from canned
goods such as fruit and vegetable juices.
5. Carbonated beverages do not meet drinking- water requirements.
Caffeinated drinks and alcohol dehydrate the body, which increases the
need for drinking water.
6. If water pipes are damaged or if local authorities advise you, turn off the
main water valves to prevent water from draining 

[CTRL] Sailors sent home for refusing vaccine

[David Sutherland]

Title: Print Article: Sailors sent home for refusing vaccine
-Caveat Lector-





 Print this article | Close this window 
Sailors sent home for refusing vaccine 
February 12 2003 

Three crew of the HMAS Kanimbla headed to the Middle East have left the ship 
after refusing to take an anthrax vaccination, one of them claimed last night. 

Able Seaman Simon Bond, an electrical engineer, said he and two others had 
been airlifted from the Kanimbla after refusing to take the vaccination. 
After receiving information from a family member at home about Gulf War 
syndrome, he decided against taking the vaccine. 
The Kanimbla's crew were asked to sign a consent form and have the 
vaccination a day after sailing from Darwin. Sent back to Sydney, Able Seaman 
Bond (pictured) told ABC TV's 7:30 Report last night that the ship's 
engineer had warned him he would be moved from his home port to Perth and face 
further action if he refused the vaccine. 
He said he took the engineer's comments as a direct threat against his career 
in the navy. 
"Bloody oath I did, if that's not saying if you don't take the injection 
we're going to try and stuff you over then I don't know what is," Able Seaman 
Bond said.
"If you walked into a doctor in civvy street and he gave you this 
information, there is no way in hell you'd let him jab it into you." 
The Kanimbla is now in the Indian Ocean. A defence force spokesman, Brigadier 
Mike Hannan, said any crew failing to take the vaccine would be removed for 
their own safety. He denied action would be taken against those who refused the 
vaccine.
AAP

This story was found at: 
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/02/12/1044927607793.html 








 
A HREF=""www.ctrl.org/A
DECLARATION  DISCLAIMER
==
CTRL is a discussion  informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.

Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 A HREF=""Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]/A

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 A HREF=""ctrl/A

To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

[CTRL] Anthrax jabs mutiny widens amid fears of cancer, sterility

[David Sutherland]

Title: Print Article: Anthrax jabs mutiny widens amid fears of cancer, sterility
-Caveat Lector-





 Print this article | Close this window 
Anthrax jabs mutiny widens amid fears of cancer, 
sterility ByCraig Skehan February 13 2003 



The anthrax rebellion in the armed forces has widened, with another eight 
sailors en route to or already in the Persian Gulf refusing inoculations - 
bringing the total to 11.
The protests have been prompted by fears of serious health problems despite 
assurances from the Federal Government.
The Australian Defence Force confirmed yesterday that the eight were being 
sent back to Australia. Three sailors on HMAS Kanimbla who earlier refused the 
protective jabs are already back in the country.
Dozens of other Australian personnel have expressed serious concerns, fuelled 
by internet reports linking the anthrax vaccine to sterility in men and serious 
diseases like cancer.
There have been documented cases of major allergic reactions experienced by 
about one in 100,000 people being vaccinated. Other serious short-term results 
have also shown up among a very small proportion of the millions inoculated 
worldwide.
Claims of other, longer-term dangers have not been established, with some 
experts arguing that there is not enough evidence.
Rumours are circulating among service personnel that at least one Defence 
Force member has had a serious adverse reaction, but the force has denied 
this.
An anti-vaccination group, the Australian Vaccination Network, claimed 
yesterday that a Defence Department official had said privately that the 
affected person had been on board HMAS Darwin.
The Defence Minister, Robert Hill, maintained yesterday that there was no 
danger. "There have been some service personnel that have been reluctant to be 
vaccinated, which I don't quite understand because I am advised that it's a 
perfectly safe vaccination," he told ABC Radio.
About 2000 Defence Force personnel are being sent to the Gulf, and all must 
have an anthrax inoculation to serve in the area.
In the United States, there has been a campaign against the compulsory 
vaccination of military personnel. More than half of the 16,000 British forces 
being sent to the Gulf have refused the anthrax vaccine.
One of the three sailors sent home from the Kanimbla, Able Seaman Simon Bond, 
said there had been threats to the careers of those refusing, even though the 
vaccinations were supposed to be voluntary.
"All my mates are still on board the Kanimbla and they've still got concerns 
about this and there's nothing they can do about it," he said. "They've 
definitely created a morale issue. No one was happy about it."
The Defence Force chief, General Peter Cosgrove, denied at a Senate estimates 
committee hearing yesterday that there had been unfair pressure on service 
personnel. He did not want to discuss the numbers of those resisting because 
continuing "sympathetic discussion" was reducing the level of concern.
The Defence Force has acknowledged that originally 25 sailors on the Kanimbla 
objected to receiving the vaccine. Senior officers said yesterday that the 
inoculations did not begin until February 5, when the ship was already en route, 
because medical personnel had been waiting for educational material.
But the Opposition's spokesman on defence, Senator Chris Evans, last night 
criticised the delay, saying: "This increased risks faced by those on the 
Kanimbla. As a result those on board could not make the decision with the 
support of family and friends.
"Labor is very concerned about reports that sailors were subjected to 
pressure to take the vaccine."

This story was found at: 
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/02/12/1044927665050.html 








 
A HREF=""www.ctrl.org/A
DECLARATION  DISCLAIMER
==
CTRL is a discussion  informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.

Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 A HREF=""Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]/A

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 A HREF=""ctrl/A

To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

[CTRL] Not Suggesting Anyone Should Entirely Ignore [Virus Alerts]

[Euphorian]

-Caveat Lector-

Virtual Card for You
http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/virtual.card.fo
r.you.html

Reported on: January 10, 2001

Last Updated on: January 23, 2002 09:42:52 AM

Symantec Security Response encourages you to ignore any messages
regarding this hoax. It is harmless and is intended only to cause
unwarranted concern.

Type: Hoax



Numerous variants in several languages of this hoax have been circulated.
The Virtual Card for
You is a hoax that should be ignored. Several examples of these hoaxes are
as follows:

English

Example 1
Virus Alert VIRUS WARNING To ALL INTERNET USERS:

A new virus has just been discovered that has been classified by Microsoft
(www.microsoft.com) and by McAfee (www.mcafee.com) as the most
destructive ever!

This virus was discovered yesterday afternoon by McAfee and no vaccine
has yet been developed. This virus simply destroys Sector Zero from the
hard disk, where vital information for its functioning are stored.

This virus acts in the following manner: It sends itself automatically to all
contacts on your list with the title A Virtual Card for You.

As soon as the supposed virtual card is opened, the computer freezes so
that the user has to reboot. When the ctrl+alt+del keys or the reset
button are pressed, the virus destroys Sector Zero, thus permanently
destroying the hard disk.

Please distribute this message to the greatest number of people possible.
Yesterday in just a few hours this virus caused panic in New York,
according to news broadcast by CNN www.cnn.com). This alert was
received by an employee of Microsoft itself.

Example 2
PLEASE ADVISE EVERYONE YOU KNOW

Subject: A new virus has just been discovered that has been classified by
Microsoft ( www.microsoft.com ) and by McAfee (www.mcafee.com ) as
the most destructive ever! This virus was discovered yesterday afternoon
by McAfee and no vaccine has yet been developed.

This virus simply destroys Sector Zero from the hard disk, where vital
information for its functioning are stored. This virus acts in the following
manner: It sends itself automatically to all contacts on your list with the
title
A Virtual Card for You.
As soon as the supposed virtual card is opened, the computer freezes so
that the user has to reboot.

When the ctrl+alt+del keys or the reset button are pressed, the virus
destroys Sector Zero, thus permanently destroying the hard disk.

Yesterday in just a few hours this virus caused panic in New York,
according to news broadcast by CNN (www.cnn.com ).

This alert was received by an employee of Microsoft itself.
So don't open any mails with subject

A Virtual Card for You.

As soon as you get the mail, delete it.
Please pass on this mail to everyone you know.

Example 3

ATENTION TO THIS WARNING...

It just have been discovered a new virus that was clasified by MICROSOFT
and by MCAFEE as the biggest destroyer of all times. This virus was
discovered
yesterday afternoon by MCAFFE and a vaccine for this virus is not found
yet. It just destroy the 0 track of hard drive where the vital information
for
its FUNctionality.

It works as follows:

1- It sends itself by Internet with the subject A VIRTUAL CARD FOR YOU.
2- Locks the computer, so user must reboot it.
3- At the moment that the keys CTRL-ALT-DEL or RESET are pressed, it
destroy the 0 track and the hard drive for ever.

Please distribute this email to as many people as possible, in some hours of
yesterday this virus caused panic in NEW YORK as CNN said.

Dutch
WAARSCHUWING !!!

Er is een nieuw virus ontdekt door Microsoft en Mc Afee. Men zegt dat
het een fataal virus is. Het virus is twee dagen geleden in Amerika ontdekt
en er is nog geen anti virus. Het virus vernietigt Sector Zero van de hard
disk, waar vitale info is opgeslagen voor het functioneren van je PC. Het
virus verspreidt zich via de contactenlijsten van de ontvangende
computers. Het virus draagt de naam: A Virtual Card for You. Zodra je de
zogenaamde kaart geopend
hebt slaat de computer zodanid vast dat je moet resetten. Ctrl + Alt + Del
betekent het einde van je harde schijf. Het virus heeft voor paniek
gezorgd in New York. Zelfs CNN maakte melding van het virus!
Dus A Virtual ! card for You niet openen ! Zodra je de mail krijgt
definitief verwijderen !  Tevens wordt door Intel gewaarschuwd voor het
e-mail An Internet Flower for you.Open het niet ! Dit virus verwijdert alle
.dll files van je hard disk. Stuur dit uit het Engels vertaalde bericht zo snel
mogelijk op naar al je contacten !(het oorspronkelijk bericht is van Neil
Quigley van New Media Computer Corp).

French
Information à diffuser !!! Attention , un nouveau virus très destructeur
arrive, lire la notice ci dessous. Information à diffuser très rapidement
pour arrêter ce virus. 1. Un nouveau virus vient d'être découvert et a été
classé par Microsoft comme étant le plus destructeur n'ayant jamais existé
! Ce virus a été découvert hier après-midi par McAfee et aucun vaccin n'a
encore été 

[CTRL] Government Had Intelligence Suggesting Oklahoma City Attack Weeks Before McVeigh Struck

[[to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]]

-Caveat Lector-

Wednesday, February 12, 2003
FOXNews

Click on the URL below for the rest of this story:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,78305,00.html

A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A
DECLARATION  DISCLAIMER
==
CTRL is a discussion  informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.

Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]/A

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 A HREF=http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/;ctrl/A

To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

[CTRL] Crowds

[Euphorian]

-Caveat Lector-

Major heading entries below are hot linques



Gustave Le Bon's
The Crowd
Table of Contents
http://www.propaganda101.com/OnlineBooks/LeBon/LeBon_
1895/TheCrowd/LeBon_1895_toc.html


Citation: Gustave Le Bon. Table of Contents. From The Crowd: A study of
the popular mind. (Second edition). Dunwoody, Georgia: Norman S. Berg..



Table of Content

Preface

INTRODUCTION: THE ERA OF CROWDS

BOOK I THE MIND OF CROWDS

CHAPTER I GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF CROWDS-- PSYCHOLOGICAL LAW
OF THEIR MENTAL UNITY

CHAPTER II  THE SENTIMENTS AND MORALITY OF CROWDS

CHAPTER III THE IDEAS, REASONING POWER, AND IMAGINATION OF CROWDS

CHAPTER IV A RELIGIOUS SHAPE ASSUMED BY ALL THE CONVICTIONS OF
CROWDS

BOOK II THE OPINIONS AND BELIEFS OF CROWDS

CHAPTER I   REMOTE FACTORS OF THE OPINIONS AND BELIEFS OF
CROWDS

CHAPTER II  THE IMMEDIATE FACTORS OF THE OPINIONS OF CROWDS

CHAPTER III  THE LEADERS OF CROWDS AND THEIR MEANS OF PERSUASION

CHAPTER IV   LIMITATIONS OF THE VARIABILITY OF THE BELIEFS AND
OPINIONS OF CROWDS

BOOK III THE CLASSIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION OF THE DIFFERENT KINDS OF
CROWDS

CHAPTER I THE CLASSIFICATION OF CROWDS

CHAPTER II CROWDS TERMED CRIMINAL CROWDS

CHAPTER III CRIMINAL JURIES

CHAPTER IV ELECTORAL CROWDS

CHAPTER V  PARLIAMENTARY ASSEMBLIES










Forwarded for your information.  The text and intent of the article
have to stand on their own merits.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do
not believe simply because it has been handed down for many genera-
tions.  Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and
rumoured by many.  Do not believe in anything simply because it is
written in Holy Scriptures.  Do not believe in anything merely on
the authority of teachers, elders or wise men.  Believe only after
careful observation and analysis, when you find that it agrees with
reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all.
Then accept it and live up to it. The Buddha on Belief,
from the Kalama Sut

A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A
DECLARATION  DISCLAIMER
==
CTRL is a discussion  informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.

Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]/A

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 A HREF=http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/;ctrl/A

To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

[CTRL] Propaganda

[Euphorian]

-Caveat Lector-

Background: This article is taken fromthe Nazi monthly for propagandists.
It is an unusually complicated explication of Nazi propaganda.
http://www.propaganda101.com/Propaganda/Propaganda_Frame.htm
The Source: Politische Propaganda, Unser Wille und Weg, 4(1934), pp.
323-332.

Political Propaganda

Schulze-Wechsungen

No one today will doubt that political propaganda has been of major
significance in the past decades. Waves of propaganda hit Germany, leaving
a world in confusion. We had nothing similar with which to defend
ourselves. Our leaders realized too late the power and effects of this
modern weapon, a weapon without limits, that thunders more loudly than
cannon fire, that is more destructive than a gas attack.

This weapon forced the world war on us, it forged the alliance against
Germany, it brought ever new armies to the front against us, it gave them
confidence, it used every method-- because every method was at their
disposal. Success proved them right, Only their military leadership found
things impossible. For their propaganda general staff, everything was
possible.

Propaganda is the most modern of weapons. We have suffered under it, we
have learned from it. Having learned from experience its necessity, we
now use it.

Our airplanes, tanks, guns and the like we had to destroy, but not the
weapon of propaganda. How could we not have used it, who is foolish
enough to underestimate its power? We owe our rise to it and will have to
depend on it even more in the future. It is a powerful tool in molding the
nature and the thinking of the new, the modern man.

Alexander von Humboldt wrote that one must organize a lasting moral
force, which is nothing other than a firm, systematic, coherent attempt to
raise the morale of the nation, to control it.

To raise the morale of the nation..., that is both our task and our goal.
We have no desire to apply our idea outside this framework, apart from
conviction, only as a means. The National Socialist world view is unique; its
full development presumes Germans in Germany. It will win friends, even
some abroad, since it fits reality. But its deepest power is rooted in the
German nature.

Our enemy in the world war won the leaders and soldiers it needed
through propaganda. The men who make National Socialist propaganda
have another goal: to win the German people!

We may be proud that the first big step has been taken, but it is only the
beginning. What we have done points the way to what must still be done;
it is is both an obligation and a promise. The ferment of decomposition is
in the past. A new page in German history has been turned, a new age has
dawned. Future generations of historians and critics will write books about
our era.

Past German politics and war propaganda was based on sentimentality and
moral feelings, untroubled by any understanding of the psyche of the
masses. Politics depends on proper preparation, it depends on intuitive
propaganda. The direction in which propaganda takes the feelings depends
on the goals of the political leadership, on its understanding of
psychology. One must understand human perception and psychology.

Modern psychology (the word, by the way, comes from the days of
Melancthon), supported by psychiatry and neurology, attempts to discover
the laws of psychological processes through systematic experimentation
and statistical analysis (e.g., logical thinking). These modern methods have
led to valuable conclusions, but they are not sufficient by themselves.
There are imponderables in the psyche of individuals as well as of the
masses that can scarcely be explained. Neither psychological experiments
or statistical techniques can produce laws that the propagandist can apply
with mathematical certainty. This is not to say that certain psychological
discoveries should be unused or rejected.

Few people are able to bring heart and mind into full agreement.
Propaganda often has particular importance in that it speaks to the
emotions rather than to pure understanding.  The individual as well as the
masses are subject to attitudes; their emotions determine their
condition.The politician may not coldly ignore these emotions; he must
recognize and understand them if he is to choose the proper of
propaganda to reach his goals.

Although modern psychology has not found any absolute principles for
propagandists, and is unlikely to to do so, the total ignorance of
psychology on the part of former German statesmen had catastrophic
consequences, as we know from experience. Professor C. Daenell has this
to say with respect to our psychological relationship to South America
during the war: We were very bad psychologists. Professor Adolf Rapp
complains: We were inexperienced and inept when it came to dealing
with other nations. We did not  understand their way of thinking, even
though we praised ourselves for our ability to accept others. We failed at
practical human relations.

Propaganda strives for long term effects; 

[CTRL] daughter sentenced, Pope against war, Neo-McCarthyism

[Smart News]

-Caveat Lector-








this may be heavy for survivors

forwarded from L Moss Sharman Daughter Gets 48 Years In Slaying of Her Father - Siblings Say No Sentence Could Bring Justice By Maria Glod 2/11/03 "Clara Jane Schwartz, a former college student obsessed by vampires, assassins and magic, was sentenced yesterday to 48 years in prison for persuading a friend to kill her father, a respected Loudoun County scientist." http://www.washingtonpost.com/

http://www.natcath.org/NCR_Online/archives/021403/021403e.htm
Pope's answer to Rumsfeld pulls no punches in opposing war By JOHN L. ALLEN JR. Rome - A senior Vatican official says that Catholic "just war" doctrine is undergoing an evolution similar to that on capital punishment, from grudging acceptance to a quasi-abolitionist stance. In both cases, he said, modern society has the means to resolve problems without the use of lethal force. Thus the Catholic response to a "preventive war" in Iraq is a resounding "no," the official said"I heard too that the Americans foresee a loss of 15,000 American soldiers. Whoever is preparing a war has to take into account the cost that any strike will provoke on the enemies, in the area, on friends, and on its own side."

http://utminers.utep.edu/best/papers/mccarthy.htm
Neo-McCarthyism, the Patriot Act, and the New Surveillance Culture 
Dr. Steven Best

Welcome to post-constitutional America. While lip service is paid to freedom, basic liberties such as the First Amendment right to freedom of speech and association, the Fourth Amendment right prohibiting illegal search and seizures, and the Sixth Amendment right to a speedy and public trial are increasingly jeopardized. George Bush, John Ashcroft, the Justice Department, and the FBI have tossed the Constitution into the shredder as they perversely redefine concepts such as democracy, patriotism, terrorism, and security. While Americans continue to be entertained by the weapons of mass distraction, the country moves ever more quickly toward tyranny. With the dystopias of both Orwell's 1984 (overt state domination) and Huxley's Brave New World (insidious thought control and intense normalization) on the horizon, the gravest threats to freedom today stem not from the Al Qaeda, but rather from our own government. 
A HREF=""www.ctrl.org/A
DECLARATION  DISCLAIMER
==
CTRL is a discussion  informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.

Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 A HREF=""Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]/A

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 A HREF=""ctrl/A

To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

[CTRL] information on Orne

[Smart News]

-Caveat Lector-





this may be heavy for survivors

all accusations are alleged

fromerly on the FMSF Scientific and Professional Advisory Board, September 1, 1998 Martin Orne, M.D., Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA


http://www.towardfreedom.com/may98/messing.htm

Messing with Our Minds
With links to CIA mind control experts and accused child abusers, the false memory movement turns "blaming the victim" into a scienceHUSAYN AL-KURDI


It should come as no surprise, then, that long-time CIA and "intelligence complex" operatives turn up on the FMSF Advisory Board. Perhaps the most public member has been Dr. Louis Joylon "Jolly" West, a legendary figure in CIA mind control circles operating out of UCLA. Another is Dr. Martin Orne, an authority on torture who currently works at the University of Pennsylvania's Experimental Psychiatry Lab. While studying the effects of over 16 biochemical warfare agents until the early 1970s, Orne considered the effectiveness of choking, blistering, and vomiting agents, toxins, poison gas, and various incapacitating chemicals. During the same period, he also worked with the Cornell University-based Human Ecology Fund, sharing his findings with Dr. Even Cameron, who was then based at the McGill University Allen Institute in Montreal. At Human Ecology, electroshock, lobotomies, drugs, incapacitants, hypnosis, sleep deprivation, and radio control of the brain were all specialties of the house.

http://members.aol.com/SMARTNEWS/Sample-Issue-19.htm
The following article contains excerpts from two radio interviews (on CKLN Radio with Wayne Morris) by Lynne Moss-Sharman. Lynne Moss-Sharman is the Canada contact for ACHES-MC (Advocacy Committee for Human Experimentation Survivors - Mind Control) 
On tape 26A, Lynne discusses more of the Stone Angels work, her past abuse and history, the alleged participation in mind control projects by Ewen Cameron, Jose Delgado, Martin Orne and George Estabrooks. 

all accusations are alleged
http://members.aol.com/SMARTNEWS/Sample-Issue-15.htm
The following article came from the testimony at the Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments by Claudia Mullen, a survivor of alleged government sponsored mind control and ritual abuse. Please use caution while reading this, it may be triggering, especially if you have a similar background. "Statement to Presidential Report on Radiation, Claudia S. Mullen, March 15, 1995.

Twice I overheard conversations concerning a place or part of the agency called ORD (Office of Research and Development) run by Dr. Greene, Dr. Stephen Aldrich, Martin Orne and Morse Allen. Once a crude remark was made by Dr. Gottlieb about a possible leak over in New Orleans East, involving a large group of retarded children who were being given massive doses of radiation. He asked, why Wilson was "so worried about a few retarded kids? After all, they would be the least likely kids to spill the beans!"
The second time I heard Dr. Martin Orne, who was the "director of the scientific office" and later changed to Institute for Experimental Research, (in order to keep more funding coming from different sources for the radiation and mind control experiments). Dr. Orne suggested "stepping up the amounts of all the stressors used on the subjects, such as chemical, biologicals, increasing the volts and length of the electric shock treatments, hypnosis and sexual humiliation" (the blackmail portion of the projects). He stated, "it needed to be done faster, then get rid of the subjects, as it was asking for "us" to come back and haunt them, by remembering." Dr. Heath at first refused but more of the doctors agreed; although some seemed sincerely horrified at what they either witnessed or heard about.
Dr. Orne demanded that "executive action" be taken. When one of my "splits"; as they referred to my dissociated personalities, asked him (Dr. Orne) what "executive action meant?" ; he replied, "it means we get rid of the little bitchyou! Don't you get it? You simply disappear, John (Dulles) can order that at any time; and even Mac (John McCone) would never even know what happened to you!"

http://members.aol.com/SMARTNEWS/Sample-Issue-17.htm
Please use caution while reading this section. On the rest of the transcript of Tape 15A, Claudia talks about more about mind control programming and some of the alleged connections between the various doctors and others involved. These people included: Sidney Gottlieb, Martin Orne (who is on the FMSF Scientific and Professional Advisory Board), Dr. Steven Aldridge, Morse Allen, Dr. Ewen Cameron (mentioned in "The Search for the Manchurian Candidate"), Dr. Heath and Mr. Fenner. 

http://members.aol.com/smartnews/Sample-Issue-35.htm
>From http://members.aol.com/smartnews/fivecases.htm The Law and Mind Control - A LOOK AT THE LAW AND GOVERNMENT MIND CONTROL THROUGH FIVE CASES - CIA VS SIMS - UNITED STATES VS STANLEY - ORLIKOW, ET AL VS UNITED STATES - KRONISCH VS UNITED 

[CTRL] Fwd: Muted Response to Ashcroft's Sneak Attack on Liberties

[William Shannon]

-Caveat Lector-



A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A
DECLARATION  DISCLAIMER
==
CTRL is a discussion  informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.

Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]/A

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 A HREF=http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/;ctrl/A

To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

---BeginMessage---
-Caveat Lector-

 FAIR-L
Fairness  Accuracy In Reporting
   Media analysis, critiques and activism

MEDIA ADVISORY:
Muted Response to Ashcroft's Sneak Attack on Liberties

February 12, 2003

In an attempt to further increase the government's surveillance and law
enforcement powers, and decrease judicial review and protections of civil
liberties, the Department of Justice has secretly drafted a sweeping
sequel to the USA Patriot Act of 2001.

Despite the draft legislation's authoritarian provisions-- including one
that would empower the government to strip Americans of their citizenship
if they participate in the lawful activities of any group that the
attorney general labels terrorist-- mainstream U.S. media have responded
with only a handful of news stories.

The news was broken on February 7 by the Center for Public Integrity,
which obtained and published a full copy of the DOJ's draft Domestic
Security Enhancement Act of 2003 or Patriot Act II legislation
(www.public-i.org).

According to CPI, the January 9, 2003 draft was prepared by Attorney
General John Ashcroft's staff and has not been officially released by the
DOJ. Elected officials were kept in the dark about Ashcroft's initiative,
says CPI: Senior members of the Senate Judiciary Committee minority staff
have inquired about Patriot II for months and have been told as recently
as this week that there is no such legislation being planned.

Among other things, the draft includes provisions that would:

* Authorize a DNA database of suspected terrorists-- a category so
broadly defined that it could, according to CPI, include anyone associated
with suspected groups, and any noncitizens suspected of certain crimes
or of having supported any group designated as terrorist.

* Nullify most law enforcement consent decrees passed before September 11,
2001 that do not relate to civil rights violations. Consent decrees are
legal agreements that limit law enforcement's ability to gather
information about individuals and groups. Many, such as New York City's
Handschu agreement (which was severely weakened by a federal court ruling
on Tuesday), were arrived at in response to police abuses, including the
harassment of social justice groups.

* Enable the government to expatriate U.S. citizens if, with the intent
to relinquish his nationality, he becomes a member of, or provides
material support to, a group that the United Stated has designated as a
'terrorist organization.' Currently, you must formally state your intent
to give up U.S. citizenship in order to lose it, or take a drastic action
such as serving in the military of a state that is at war with the U.S.
CPI warns that Patriot Act II would allow the government to infer that
intent from an individual's political associations, and possibly deport
any citizen who participated in the work of a group that the attorney
general chooses to brand as terrorist, even if he or she broke no laws.

These provisions build on the expanded law enforcement powers established
by the first USA Patriot Act, which created the new category of domestic
terrorism, a crime defined in part as activities that involve acts
dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws and
which appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce civilians or the
government. In examining the measures that Patriot Act II would authorize
against suspected terrorists, it's important to recall that the legal
definition of domestic terrorism is now so broad that it could encompass
traditional forms of political protest, such as non-violent civil
disobedience.

The Patriot Act II draft 

[CTRL] AMERICA'S FLIRTATION WITH THE CONCEPT OF EMPIRE

[William Shannon]

-Caveat Lector-
http://www.etherzone.com/2003/bren021203.shtml



CLEANING UP THE MESSES
AMERICA'S FLIRTATION WITH THE CONCEPT OF EMPIRE
By: Phil Brennan

"War is Hell" said General William Tecumseh Sherman, the man who inflicted the horrors of Perdition on a good-sized chunk of the Confederacy to emphasize his point. 

War is also stupid, and no less so even when it is necessary for self-defense. It is also immoral when waged for any reason other than self-defense. Wars kill people, you see, and you damned well better have a good reason for offing large numbers of your fellow human beings before you start dropping bombs on them.

We are now facing a war which will be hell, stupid, and, if many of the anti-war groups are correct, immoral.

We are faced with the question of its necessity - will the war if it comes be justified as being self-defensive in nature? And as the Pope points out, the self-defense justification does not allow a pre-emptive attack based on the mere assumption that Iraq may some time in the future:

1. possess nuclear weapons which it might use against us or its neighbors, or 

2. supply terrorists with those and other weapons of mass destruction to be used against us and the rest of the free world.

What would clearly justify the use of the self-defense argument would be a demonstration of the fact that Iraq has already attacked the U.S. In that case, war would be morally justified since Iraq would be cast as an aggressor who needs to be brought to heel.

There is every reason to believe that this is indeed the case. There is evidence that strongly suggests that Iraq was the source of  the anthrax used in the fall 2001 anthrax letter attacks which killed five Americans - a fact obscured by the FBI's idiot pursuit of Dr. Steven Hatfill, but that's another story.

If, as the available evidence suggests, Iraq has already been instrumental in an attack against the U.S., an attack likely to be repeated, then a war against Saddam Hussein would be a just war. 

The warnings from the peaceniks that an attack on Iraq will create hatred against the U.S. and spark a huge and violent reaction against us, fail to recognize that as long as we continue to support  Israel, which we will,  we will continue to be hated and attacked by much of the Arab world. They don't need a war against Iraq to stir them up. They're already at fever pitch.

That having been said, there are other factors to be looked at. And oil is not one of them, no matter what the Ludite peaceniks claim.  If oil were the causus belli, our troops would now be surrounding oil rich Venezuela, in our own backyard, where the crazed Marxist president Hugo Chavez is busy creating another Latin gulag in concert with his hero Fidel Castro, and threatening a sizeable segment of our oil supply. Check the prices at the pump since the oil strike in Venezuela began in protest against comrade Hugo.

What is worth looking at, and contemplating carefully, is America's very obvious flirtation with the concept of empire. 

The world is a messy place, and the Middle East is one of the messiest places of all. Looked at from the perspective of the New World Order advocates among us,  the preeminent position of the United States as the world's sole super-power  dictates that we must assume the function of cleaning up the messes so that we can all live in an orderly and prosperous world. After all, if we don't do it, who will?

This is a new wrinkle on the old New World Order idea. That was based on the U.S. surrendering our sovereignty to a world government. To George Bush, that's plain unthinkable.; He's gone to great pains to make it obvious that, like it or not, the U.S. comes first in all things - a quite refreshing view in an age where U.S. presidents - except of course Ronald Reagan - routinely saw America properly seated in the back of the bus.  

The new New World Order thus is to be one solely owned and operated by a beneficent United States of America on a mission to save the world from itself. Madam Albright said it best when she asked what good is having all of that power if we don't plan to use it?

And even without an assault on Iraq, we're already half-way there in the Middle East. Take a look at a map of the area and you'll see that it is teeming  with growing cohorts of American troops. Listen to what we are being told - that we plan to stay there indefinitely, that our legions will, in effect, be there to guarantee the security of the area, just as the legions of ancient Rome kept the peace wherever they were garrisoned (except in Germany, which in those days, unlike the present, kinda liked going to war).

Moreover, we are now being assured that the monstrous cost of occupying and "democratizing" Iraq will be partially paid out of Iraq's oil revenues, just as the cost of keeping Rome's legions on station - and the price of the bread and circuses supplied to the Roman people - were paid by taxing the locals enjoying the alleged 

[CTRL] NATO - A DINOSAUR DUE FOR EXTINCTION

[William Shannon]

-Caveat Lector-
http://www.etherzone.com/2003/sart021203.shtml



NATO - A DINOSAUR DUE FOR EXTINCTION
COUNTRIES ONLY HAVE INTERESTS, NOT FRIENDS
By: SARTRE

Congratulations President Bush! You accomplished in a mere two years what Khruschev or Brezhnev couldn’t during the entire cold war. Driving a wedge in the alliance may seem dangerous to most observers, but for once, you did the right thing. The stated mission of NATO has long passed into history, and its demise and dissolution is one of the few bright spots in the continuing war against the NWO. Contrary to the whining of the familiar fifth column suspects - Richard Perle, Frank Gaffney and David Horowitz - real Americas are not served by jingoism.



 




When France, Germany and Belgium vetoed a U.S. request to provide military assistance to Turkey, NATO received a diagnosis that the patient has recovered its lucidity and has directed their release from the asylum. Perle’s egotism knows no limits. When he states that : "France is no longer the ally it once was . . . I have long thought that there were forces in France intent on reducing the American role in the world”, you hear the quintessential proponent of the “Hyperpower” vision for the United States. The superpower status of military projection has not brought the promised Pax Americana. Now we have an open break that clearly states that not everyone endorses that specter of global governance.

Recent expansion of NATO to add several Eastern European countries has more to do with calling the red, white and blue welcome wagon of foreign aid, than real security. It should be evident that EU countries are not willing to extend a neocolonialism of occupation, much less to accept it, any longer on their own soil. Its time to bring the troops back home, the Berlin wall came down, and Germans don’t need to be hosting an occupying army. Or does the subtle objective of the War Party, seek to prevent the reassertion of any nationalism or union on the continent that could challenge the imperial forces of the beneficent U.S. empire?

Apprehension that remnants of the East German Stasi secret police, will resurrect fears of the past, ignores the strong non intervention attitude that has steadily grown since the end of WWII. The brutal lessons of total destruction have been internalized by most Europeans, while many Americans float through a cloud of self denial that they are immune to the repercussions of their pompous foreign interventionism.

NATO is the invention of the United States and the British. The European Union countries fully appreciate the risks of accepting a dollar dominated economy and a Bush-Blair-Sharon foreign policy. The prevailing memory of Western Europe recalls the history on the Middle East and the reasons why that eternal conflict persists. Turkey’s response, invoking NATO's Article IV, which says "parties will consult together whenever, in the opinion of any of them, the territorial integrity, political independence or security of any of the parties is threatened", will not preserve an alliance that is on life support. Pulling the plug will not harm the patient, but may well restore its health.

Internationalists are warmongers, and alliances foster belligerency. Any similarity in the ostensive failed assassination attempt on George H Bush with the successful slaying of Archduke Franz Ferdinand? Protective alliances triggered mobilization that lead to the great carnage known as WW I. And who can forget the justification to reign in a non repentant Germany was that treaty with Poland? Just ask a Pole how well they did under the victors of WW II . . .

Before the first gun has fired - the war to expand greater Israel - this psychotic policy has produced causalities. Note the fall out that comes when fighting in the desert: “German diplomats are well aware that an American plan for a robust UN inspection system was floated last year and dropped, having drawn little international enthusiasm. A European reworking of that plan, drawn up without the consultation of the United States, would be seen only as an affront by Washington.” 

President Vladimir Putin, who arrived in Paris on Monday after weekend talks in Berlin with German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, said Russia believes the crisis must be resolved diplomatically.

"We are against the war," Putin said. "At the moment, that's the view I have." 

The prospect of Russia nabbing victory using detente when the Soviets lost the cold war bodes the formation of a New Europasiation.  While trade and fair commerce between nations is usually beneficial, the prospects of swapping one distant chum for a former inimical neighbor, can have its own risks. From the report, New  Partnerships after the Cold War Era by Elif Hatun Kilicbeyli: “With the concept of the regional cooperation, the importance of the counter dependency, the contribution to the economic integration and the integration to world economy are 

[CTRL] President Bush, Likudnik

[William Shannon]

-Caveat Lector-
http://polyconomics.com/showarticle.asp?heading=Memo+on+the+Margin



President Bush, Likudnik
Memo To: Website Fans, Browsers, Clients
From: Jude Wanniski
Re: Ariel Sharon’s lieutenant, GWB

Now if I had written this analysis in the Washington Post of how Israel’s Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, is practically our President’s puppeteer on Mideast policy, I could not possibly survive the criticisms Polyconomics would get from the world at large. I actually think the President and Sharon are not exactly joined at the hip as I believe the President is serious about a Palestinian state and Sharon would only accept one if he had no other choice. It is worth noting that the President urged Yasir Arafat to accept the proposal for a Palestinian state before he was inaugurated in January 2001, and Bush was furious when Arafat rejected the proposal. Actually Arafat continued the negotiations with Israel in February and was practically at the point of agreement when the talks were suspended for the Israeli elections. 

By the way, Robert G. Kaiser is not a cub reporter, but in the top tier of journalists at the Post:

* * * * *

Bush and Sharon Nearly Identical On Mideast Policy 

By Robert G. Kaiser
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, February 9, 2003; Page A01 

Running for reelection last month, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon of Israel repeatedly boasted of the "deep friendship" he has built with the Bush administration -- "a special closeness," he called it. He thanked President Bush for understanding Israel's security needs and for providing "the required leeway in our ongoing war on terrorism." He praised Bush's latest proposals for reaching a Palestinian-Israeli peace agreement -- a plan, said Sharon, that he and Bush had agreed on together.

Sharon was describing what his American supporters call the closest relationship in decades, perhaps ever, between a U.S. president and an Israeli government. "This is the best administration for Israel since Harry Truman [who first recognized an independent Israel]," said Thomas Neumann, executive director of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, a think tank that promotes strategic cooperation with Israel as vital to U.S. security interests. 

For the first time, a U.S. administration and a Likud government in Israel are pursuing nearly identical policies. Earlier U.S. administrations, from Jimmy Carter's through Bill Clinton's, held Likud and Sharon at arm's length, distancing the United States from Likud's traditionally tough approach to 

the Palestinians. But today, as Neumann noted, Israel and the United States share a common view on terrorism, peace with the Palestinians, war with Iraq and more. Neumann and others said this change was made possible by the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and their aftermath.

The Bush administration's alignment with Sharon delights many of its strongest supporters, especially evangelical Christians, and a large part of organized American Jewry, according to leaders in both groups, who argue that Palestinian terrorism pushed Bush to his new stance. But it has led to a freeze on diplomacy in the region that is criticized by Arab countries and their allies, and by many past and current officials who have participated in the long-running, never-conclusive Middle East "peace process."

"Every president since at least Nixon has seen the Arab-Israeli conflict as the central strategic issue in the Middle East," said Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger, President Bill Clinton's national security adviser. "But this administration sees Iraq as the central challenge, and . . . has disengaged from any serious effort to confront the Arab-Israeli problem."

The turning point came last June, when Bush embraced Sharon's view of the Palestinians and made Yasser Arafat's removal as leader of the Palestinian Authority a condition of future diplomacy. That was "a clear shift in policy," Kenneth R. Weinstein, director of the Washington office of the Hudson Institute, a conservative supporter of Israel and Likud. The June speech was "a departure point," agreed Ralph Reed, chairman of the Georgia Republican Party and former director of the Christian Coalition. 

Since then, U.S. policy has been in step with Sharon's. The peace process is "quiescent," said retired Marine Gen. Anthony Zinni, Bush's special envoy to the region. "I've kind of gone dormant," he added. In December Bush appointed an articulate, hard-line critic of the traditional peace process, Elliott Abrams, director of Mideast affairs for the National Security Council.

"The Likudniks are really in charge now," said a senior government official, using a Yiddish term for supporters of Sharon's political party. Neumann agreed that Abrams's appointment was symbolically important, not least because Abrams's views were shared by his boss, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, by Vice President Cheney and by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. "It's a strong 

[CTRL] Israel's Heroism is Terrorism by Anyone Else

[William Shannon]

-Caveat Lector-
http://www.mediamonitors.net/jamesjdavid18.html



Israel's Heroism is Terrorism by Anyone Else 
by James J. David

The Israeli astronaut Ilan Ramon is a national hero in Israel and is being honored in America as the same. But did his past accomplishments qualify him as a hero or something else? In the eyes of many his actions would be qualified as terrorism if it were conducted by any other organization. 

In 1981 the State of Israel dispatched its jets to attack and destroy a nuclear reactor power plant in Iraq and in the process of destroying Iraq's nuclear power plant the Israelis killed a French scientist and 2 other innocent civilians. The many knee-jerk supporters of Israel have regarded this attack as a righteous move by the wise and clever Israelis to prevent Iraq from developing a nuclear weapon. The fact is, however, that Iraq's nuclear reactor was in compliance with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, of which Iraq was a charter signatory, and which Israel had never signed. Dr. Sigvard Eklund, Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, stated to the U.N. Security Council on 19 June 1981 that the Israelis had acted on the basis of faulty intelligence and really had no justification at all for what they had done. Dr. Eklund goes on and says "In fulfilling its responsibilities the Agency has inspected the Iraqi reactors and has not found evidence of any activity not in accordance with the Non-Proliferation Treaty." 

The President of the United Nations Security Council, Mr. Porfirio Muñoz Ledo criticized the action and attitude of Israel in no uncertain terms: "The reasons on which the Government of Israel bases its contention are as unacceptable as the act of aggression it committed. It is inadmissible to invoke the right to self-defense when no armed attack has taken place. The concept of preventive war, which for many years served as justification for the abuses of powerful States, since it left it to their discretion to define what constituted a threat to them, was definitively abolished by the Charter of the United Nations. 

Israel's attack on Iraq's nuclear installations is not an isolated act; it should be seen as the climax of escalating violations of international law. The background to it has already been described both by the General Assembly and the Security Council. It includes annexation of territory by conquest, persistence in an illegal occupation, the denial of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, and frequent acts of aggression and harassment against neighboring States. Even the United States joined in condemning Israel's attack on the Osirak nuclear facility, although apologetically so, but the Israelis dismissed the condemnation and wailed about always being persecuted by the U.N., all the while continuing their own development of nuclear weapons. 

Although the director of the International Atomic Energy Agency could say with certainty that the Iraqis were not diverting uranium or producing plutonium at Osirak as the Israelis had claimed, and although the United Nations Security Council had passed a resolution condemning Israel's action, the Israeli misrepresentation has been kept alive in the minds of the American people. 

But the attack on Iraq's nuclear power plant was not the only accomplishment that qualifies Israeli astronaut Ilan Ramon as a national hero in the eyes of Israelis and now in the eyes of most Americans. In addition to the unprovoked attack on Iraq's nuclear power plant the Jewish "hero" fought in the invasion of Lebanon in 1982 where the Israeli air force was unopposed over Beirut's skies. Ramon and his fellow heroes dropped wave after wave of napalm and cluster bombs on schools, hospitals and apartment buildings, culminating in the around-the-clock terror-bombing of downtown Beirut in August, 1982. The Israelis killed an estimated 20,000 civilians in Lebanon. 

The most outrageous double standard in the world today is the different ways by which Israeli terrorism and other terrorism is judged in the court of "public opinion," which really means the court of the controlled media. Any other nation committing such aggression would be labeled an "axis of evil" and any other individual leading an attack on another country's nuclear power plant and dropping bombs in the middle of heavily populated cities, unopposed, would be labeled a war criminal or terrorist. Instead, we honor today the death of an astronaut, not because of what he did but for what we are told was honorable and right. Israel's most crucial allies include the mass media of the United States. Together with top officials in Washington, news outlets keep reinforcing the assumption that the Israeli government and it's supposedly "heroes" can do little wrong. Think carefully and decide for yourselves how much longer you will accept this double standard. 

James J. David is a retired Brigadier General and a graduate of the U.S. Army's Command and 

[CTRL] Hard To Believe

[William Shannon]

-Caveat Lector-
http://reese.king-online.com/Reese_20030212/index.php



Hard To Believe
by Charley Reese

Probably the toughest thing for most Americans to do is to recognize that their own government is deliberately deceiving them. Americans have a tendency to place implicit faith in their leaders.

Unfortunately, there have been too many instances of government deception for me to overcome skepticism. The Gulf of Tonkin resolution, which plunged us into a real war in Vietnam, was based on an incident that never happened. In the buildup to the first Gulf War, two major deceptions were practiced on the American people. One is the infamous tale of Iraqi soldiers yanking babies out of incubators. It never happened. The other is the claim that Iraqi forces were massing for an invasion of Saudi Arabia. That, too, never occurred.

The fact that Saddam Hussein lacks credibility doesn't mean that President Bush and his administration have it. They, too, have been engaging in deception. Both Bush and Secretary of State Colin Powell continue to claim that Iraq has a nuclear weapons program. The nuclear inspectors, however, say they have found no evidence of any nuclear weapons program. Moreover, a top Iraqi nuclear scientist who defected to Canada (and therefore has no obligation to tell American officials what they want to hear) broke his silence recently. He was in Iraq up until 1998.

He said Iraq was so devastated by the war that scientists working on the nuclear program were all pulled off and reassigned to help rebuild the country's infrastructure. Dr. Imad Khadduri, now a college instructor in Toronto, said, "All we had after the war from that nuclear program were ruins, memoirs and reports of what we had done ... on the nuclear weapon side, I am more than definitely sure nothing has been done." In an interview with Reuters, he said further, "For Bush to continue brandishing this image of a superhuman Iraqi nuclear power program is a great fallacious information."

Once again, Powell brought up the aluminum tubes as alleged evidence of Iraq's nuclear program. Technical experts say, however, that the kind of tubes necessary for a nuclear device must not be anodized. Yet the tubes Iraq tried to buy were specifically ordered to be anodized. Again, the nuclear inspectors agree with Iraq and not with Bush and Powell.

Bush has repeatedly cited the 1988 gassing of Kurds in Halabja as evidence of Iraqi cruelty. Recently, Stephen C. Pelletiere, a former CIA analyst, has reminded us of a Defense Intelligence Study that concluded that (1) the Kurds were casualties in a battle for the city between Iraqi and Iranian forces and not the object of the attack; and (2) that it was the Iranian gas that killed the Kurds.

I remember reading a story in The Washington Post about this report. Now, one of two things is inescapable: Either the U.S. government was lying when it issued the report, or the president and his people are lying today when they blame it on Iraq. It has to be one or the other.

As for Powell's dog-and-pony show, the satellite photos and the alleged voice intercepts prove nothing, and both can be easily fabricated. If you don't think American intelligence agencies indulge in fabrications and forgeries, then you have a lot of reading to do on the history of those agencies. The rest of his presentation was based on "anonymous sources" and defectors who, as any veteran intelligence officer will tell you, always have to be taken with a grain of salt. Since their request for asylum depends on the intelligence agency's recommendation, they have a tendency to say what they know the intelligence people want to hear.

In the year 2003, it is way too late for Americans to view their government as a benign big daddy who always tells the truth and always has their best interests in mind. Sadly, government just doesn't work that way. The bottom line is that Iraq is not a threat to the United States, but it does have oil that's not now controlled by any American or British company.




A HREF=""www.ctrl.org/A
DECLARATION  DISCLAIMER
==
CTRL is a discussion  informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.

Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 A HREF=""Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]/A

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 A HREF=""ctrl/A

[CTRL] Fwd: [GATA] Gold: Another short cover like the one Jesse Livermore forced on Piggly Wiggly?

[RoadsEnd]

-Caveat Lector-
 
A HREF=""www.ctrl.org/A
DECLARATION  DISCLAIMER
==
CTRL is a discussion  informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.

Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 A HREF=""Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]/A

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 A HREF=""ctrl/A

To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om
---BeginMessage---
-Caveat Lector-

Gold: A Modern Piggly Wiggly Event? 

By Jim Sinclair 
http://www.jsmineset.com/s/Home.asp 
February 12, 2003 

The recent selloff from the $390.80 high in 
gold has not and, in my opinion, will not 
alter the structure of this long-term bull 
market in gold. Gold has always been and 
will continue to be a market with 
supply/demand skirmishes between titanic 
forces with huge interests in the resulting 
price. The almost straight-up action of 
gold from $371.50 to $390.80, followed by 
a similar reaction down, has all the 
signs of a forced, expensive short cover. 

Generally, the entity that acts as 
broker/gold bank for the short cover can be  
counted on to sell the final ounces SHORT 
to the covering entity, followed by the 
gold bank's pounding of the market after the 
finish of the short cover. Generally, a short 
cover action is recognized in the market by 
pro traders who also seek to fill the final 
purchases. Everyone tries to pile on the top 
prices of a short cover to become short 
themselves, as it always falls hard just 
then. 

You might like to read about the life of the 
great trader Jesse Livermore. After he 
cornered Piggly Wiggly Stores (the Wal-
Mart of its time) on the NYSE and drove the 
price sky-high, he had a falling out with the 
chairman of PWS, who had retained him to 
effect the long corner. Livermore quit the 
operation and sold his final Piggly Wiggly 
shares SHORT to the strangled short sellers,
who were forced to buy.

Piggly Wiggly did exactly what gold did today 
-- exactly. 

If it walks like a chicken, smells like a chicken, 
clucks like a chicken, has feathers and lays 
eggs, it IS a chicken. This smells like, looks like, 
and acts like a short cover. Therefore, we well 
may have seen the first painful and bloody short 
cover of a gold-producer hedger. 

Now, did this have anything to do with the 
rather caustic announcement today that 
Randall Oliphant of Barrick Gold was fired? 

That is certainly a rough way to announce a 
parting of the ways for someone who, in truth, 
did make the company $2 billion on its hedge 
account during the bear market in gold. To 
announce that someone was fired certainly is 
not a compliment. 

I expect that this reaction in the gold price 
has either ended today at the $351.50 low 
or, at worst, will end at the next Fibonacci 
support line of $340 to $343. (Please see the 
gold chart on our Internet site.) 

The difference between Piggly Wiggly Stores and 
gold is that gold is fundamentally and technically 
in a long-term bull market. So another hedger, 
Newmont, might be shaking  in their boots tonight. 
The U.S. dollar cannot launch anything but a 
technical rally from here. There is a $3 trillion 
budget deficit coming up between the deficit 
spending plans already in place, the tax cut, and 
the potential of war with Iraq. In my opinion there 
is no way the dollar is headed long-term anywhere 
but down.

Add to this today's news that North Korea has 
missiles that could land a nuclear device in the 
United States. Personally, I want gold. Period. 

As Harry Schultz recently informed his private 
clients: We have two choices when a significant 
reaction in the price of gold occurs. We can be 
bothered by it or, like the Asian/Islamic interests,
welcome the bargain. 

I see this as an opportunity. I took advantage of it 
today in bullion. I will do it again if the cartel of 
common interest continues to push its luck. 

There are two lessons for today's activity in gold: 

1. Those of us who trade must lessen our activity. 
We have to be willing to step into the abyss when 
gold is being hammered, guided by Fibonacci 
mathematical concepts. 

We also must be willing to supply markets that 
appreciate at the 

[CTRL] Fwd: [GATA] Live by the hedge, die by the hedge

[RoadsEnd]

-Caveat Lector-
 
A HREF=""www.ctrl.org/A
DECLARATION  DISCLAIMER
==
CTRL is a discussion  informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.

Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 A HREF=""Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]/A

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 A HREF=""ctrl/A

To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om
---BeginMessage---
-Caveat Lector-

9:51p ET Wednesday, February 12, 2003

Dear Friend of GATA and Gold:

Here's more commentary from the Globe and Mail in
Toronto about the sacking of Barrick CEO Randall
Oliphant. It notes that Oliphant can hardly be alone
at Barrick in responsibility for the company's big
hedging program. But maybe a point not made in this 
commentary is important amid this week's decline 
in the gold price. That is, Barrick's board probably 
would not be replacing Oliphant so noisily unless it
believed that the trend in the gold price is now 
emphatically up, not down. 

More on that point shortly from our friend Jim
Sinclair.

CHRIS POWELL, Secretary/Treasurer
Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee Inc.

* * *

Barrick gives Mr. Hedge the boot

By MATHEW INGRAM
Globe and Mail, Toronto
Wednesday, February 12, 2003
Online Edition

http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/front/RTGAM/20030212/w
math0212/Front/homeBN/breakingnews

Live by the hedge, die by the hedge. 

It's not as catchy as live by the sword, die by the sword, 
but the point is the same: Once you become identified 
with something, if it falls out of favour, chances are that 
you will too. Barrick Gold's now-departed CEO, Randall 
Oliphant, is the latest example. Having become 
synonymous with Barrick's hedging strategy, his star 
has fallen along with the market's interest in that strategy.

There have been other things that have made life difficult 
for Mr. Oliphant lately, mind you, including missed 
production targets and weak results. If nothing else, Mr. 
Oliphant's sudden departure reinforces the fact that 
Barrick is joined at the hip with its founder and chairman 
Peter Munk, and if Mr. Munk sees you as superfluous 
— however integral you might have been beforehand 
— you might as well polish up your resume. The man 
Mr. Oliphant replaced, Paul Melnuk, suffered a similar 
fate.

Certainly, Barrick's stock has been in the doghouse 
lately, largely because of its hedging program. But, 
apart from the fact that he is the chief executive, is 
it fair to give Mr. Oliphant all the blame for that? Not 
really. For one thing, although he is often given the 
credit for it, Barrick's hedge program is hardly the 
work of a single man. In fact, the man who has 
replaced Mr. Oliphant — Gregory Wilkins — was 
Barrick's chief financial officer in the late 1980s when 
the hedge program was created.

Nevertheless, as he rose to become chief financial 
officer in 1994 (replacing Mr. Wilkins) and then chief 
executive officer in 1999, Mr. Oliphant became the 
public face of Barrick's hedging program. When 
Barrick consistently turned in better results than 
most of its major competitors, Mr. Oliphant got the 
credit, and when critics complained about the 
company's hedging approach, Mr. Oliphant was 
there to explain everything.

So is the market's dislike of Barrick's hedging program 
well-founded? In some ways, yes — in other ways, no. 
Much of the criticism comes either from wild-eyed 
conspiracy theorists who see the company as in 
cahoots with some sort of global cabal, or from those 
who don't understand it. At the same time, however, 
the market correctly sees Barrick as benefiting less 
from rising prices than some other non-hedged 
companies.

Hedging is something many commodity companies 
do, including oil and natural gas producers, because 
it protects them from swings in pricing. Aggressive 
hedging, in which large amounts of a company's future 
production are sold forward to lock in a price, makes 
sense when the price of a commodity is in a downward 
trend, as gold was for much of the 1990s. During that 
period, Mr. Oliphant looked like a genius.

Just as some oil and gas companies have found 
themsel

[CTRL] Bush budget targets the poor

[Euphorian]

-Caveat Lector-

World Socialist Web Site www.wsws.org

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/feb2003/budg-f13.shtml


WSWS : News  Analysis : North America

Bush budget targets the poor

Part three of five articles on Bush’s 2004 budget proposal

By Patrick Martin
13 February 2003

Back to screen version| Send this link by email | Email the author

This is the third in a series of articles on the social implications and
political significance of the Bush administration’s fiscal 2004 budget plan.
Part one, “The Bush budget: blueprint for a right- wing assault on the
working class”, was posted on February 11. Part two, “Welfare for the
wealthy: the Bush tax plan”, was posted on February 12. Over the next
two days, the WSWS will publish detailed analyses of the budget’s
implications for the federal Medicare and Medicaid health insurance
programs, and its consequences for public education.

While seeking an unprecedented $1.5 trillion in new tax cuts, largely
benefiting the richest Americans, the Bush administration has used its 2004
budget plan to propose a wide array of attacks on the poorest sections of
the working class, with outright cuts in some programs, tightened eligibility
requirements for others, and the shifting of much of the remaining social
welfare system from federal to state responsibility.

The new budget incorporates proposals for a crackdown on the poorest
American families, with stepped-up enforcement of eligibility requirements
for the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), school lunches, Medicaid and
other means-tested programs, under conditions where, even without such
measures, millions who are eligible for these benefits do not at present
receive them.

One item in the budget plan speaks volumes about the class interests
served by the Bush program. The Internal Revenue Service is to spend an
additional $100 million and hire 650 more officers to go after tax cheats.
The target is not millionaire fraudsters or corporations that shift their
headquarters to Bermuda or the Cayman Islands to avoid paying taxes, but
rather the millions of low-paid workers who collect the Earned Income Tax
Credit—a tax subsidy available only to those who are working but still not
making enough to live on.

Treasury officials declared that between 27 and 32 percent of EITC
payments were made to ineligible recipients. Tighter enforcement of the
eligibility rules would save $9.3 billion—a drop in the bucket compared to
the enormous tax handouts to the wealthy, but a significant loss to millions
of poorly paid working people.

Poor children receiving subsidized or free school lunches are another top
target of the Bush fraud squad. Administration spokesmen said there was
growing concern over “erroneous payments” for school lunch programs,
with as many as a quarter of the 28 million children in the program deemed
ineligible.

The new budget includes a requirement that every parent whose children
receive subsidized lunches submit documentation to qualify, including
welfare records and pay stubs. Currently parents report their incomes to
the schools and school officials do random checks to confirm eligibility.
The demand for documentation will be especially onerous because families
eligible for school lunches frequently have literacy and immigration
problems.

The Bush administration has announced plans that would complete the
destruction of welfare begun by Clinton in the 1996 “welfare reform” law.
The financial boom of the late 1990s concealed the impact of welfare
reform for a time. Welfare rolls dropped sharply and even with reduced
budgets, states were able to avoid benefit cuts and provide child care and
other services needed by recipients seeking jobs. But the onset of
recession has put hundreds of thousands of former welfare recipients on
the unemployment lines, swelling the demand for what is now called
Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF).

The Department of Health and Human Services announced plans in
December to toughen the work requirement to 40 hours a week, with no
allowance for training or education, as part of legislation renewing the
welfare reform law. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that to
meet the new work requirements an additional $8 billion to $11 billion in
new child care assistance would be needed. The new Bush budget
proposes no increase at all.

Instead, the budget would actually cut the number of children receiving
subsidized child care under all federal programs, from 2.5 million to 2.3
million over the next several years. Presently only one in seven eligible
children receives such assistance, and that proportion will drop further.
The Bush budget also freezes the TANF block grant to the states, as well
as the Child Care and Development block grant and the Social Services
block grant.

One of the most cynical moments last month’s State of the Union speech
came when Bush announced a $450 million program for mentoring the
children of prisoners—a pretense of compassion for 

[CTRL] Wall Street Journal editors brief for a Pax Americana

[Euphorian]

-Caveat Lector-

World Socialist Web Site www.wsws.org

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/feb2003/sav-f13_prn.shtml


WSWS : Book Review

Wall Street Journal editor’s brief for a “Pax Americana”

By Shannon Jones
13 February 2003

Back to screen version| Send this link by email | Email the author

The Savage Wars of Peace: Small Wars and the Rise of American Power,
Max Boot, Basic Books, 2002

The Savage Wars of Peace, by Max Boot, the editorial features editor of
the Wall Street Journal, is a tendentious book, not to be taken seriously as
a work of historiography. However, it has a certain contemporary political
significance in that the author attempts to concoct a historical
justification for the aggressive and militaristic foreign policy of the Bush
administration.

The author’s arguments are thoroughly anti-democratic. He is in favor of
“presidential wars,” that is, military actions initiated by the chief
executive without a formal declaration of war or specific authorization by
Congress.

His analysis is not so much directed at opponents of militarism, but at
those in the defense establishment whom he believes are still in the thrall
of the so-called “Vietnam syndrome.” In The Savage Wars of Peace Boot
argues against the policies of the post-Vietnam-era military leadership,
which he deems too cautious about the commitment of US forces overseas
and excessively focused on minimizing casualties.

In 2001 Boot published a column in the Wall Street Journal lamenting the
lack of US casualties in the Afghanistan war. He wrote, “The longer term
danger is that the war in Afghanistan will do nothing to dispel the
widespread impression that Americans are fat, indolent, and unwilling to
fight the barbarians on their own terms. We got into this mess in the first
place because of the widespread impression—born in Beirut in 1983,
seemingly confirmed in Mogadishu in 1993—that Americans are incapable of
suffering casualties stoically. This ‘bodybag syndrome’ is our greatest
strategic weakness” (“Winning Still Requires Getting Bloody,” Wall Street
Journal,November 14, 2001).

In his view, popular opposition to US military adventures can be neutralized
by skillful media propaganda and should not be a deterrent to
policymakers. In The Savage Wars of Peace,he writes, “Americans today are
not necessarily any more sensitive than were their early twentieth century
compatriots about having their soldiers kill large numbers of foreigners,
even foreign civilians—no one knows or much cares, it seems, exactly how
many Somalis were killed in the Battle of Mogadishu—as long as the events
are not brought home to the living roomin vivid color. The Pentagon is
aware of this, and since Vietnam it has taken pains to ensure that the US
press is not given unfettered access to the modern battlefield” (p. 330).

Impressed by the overwhelming firepower of the US military, Boot is not
alone in believing that force is the basic solution to all questions of US
foreign policy. His outlook is that of an American imperialism that is as
bloodthirsty as it is myopic. It dovetails with the bellicose and unilateralist
policies of the Bush administration. Such people envision the establishment
of a world empire based in Washington.

The last chapter of Boot’s work is titled “The Case for a Pax Americana.”
In a section headed “What Force can Achieve” he writes, “If the US is not
prepared to get its hands dirty, then it should stay home” (p. 348).

That Boot’s views are widespread within the American political
establishment and not confined to a right-wing fringe is indicated by the
number of favorable reviews his book has received. A reviewer for the
Washington Post commends Boot for having the courage to call openly for
a “new imperialism” (H.W. Brands, Washington Post, May 12, 2002). Another
review praises “the important and timely contribution Boot makes to
American strategic self-awareness” (Thomas Donnelly, Foreign Affairs,
June/July 2002). Michael Elliott of CNN, commenting on Boot’s book,
remarks, “[T]here’s nothing wrong with a little colonialism.” Brian
Urquhart, writing in the New York Review of Books, says Boot’s analysis
“contains a thoughtful list of lessons” (“Is there a case for little wars?”
October 10, 2002).

A travesty of historical analysis

To make the case for aggressive interventionism Boot resorts to a one-
sided and banal survey of history. The author undertakes a review of what
he calls America’s “small wars.” These he loosely defines as wars waged
against irregular or guerrilla forces. In this category he includes such
widely divergent interventions as the conflict with the Barbary states,
1801-1805, the suppression of the Boxer uprising in China in 1900, the US
war in the Philippines 1899-1902, the so-called Polar Bear expedition
against Soviet Russia in 1918-19, the campaign against Pancho Villa in
Mexico in 1916, the campaign against Sandino in Nicaragua, 1927-1933,and,
last but not least, Vietnam.

Boot pays little 

[CTRL] Eighteen Miles

[Euphorian]

-Caveat Lector-

UN team finds Iraq has illegal missiles
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,894550,00.html
Setback after delay is secured for resolution

Gary Younge in New York and Ewen MacAskill
Thursday February 13, 2003
The Guardian

A new and dangerous flashpoint with Iraq emerged last night when
weapons specialists called in by the UN arms inspectors judged Iraq's main
missile system to be illegal and said they should probably be destroyed.

The setback to the anti-war camp came just hours after France and
Germany secured a breathing space by forcing the US and Britain to delay
tabling a UN resolution - that would authorise war - from tomorrow until at
least early next week.

But that gain could be lost by the specialists' verdict on Iraq's Samoud 2
missiles. Although Saddam Hussein has made several concessions to the UN
weapons inspectors recently, destruction of the Samoud 2 missiles may
prove to be a step too far for him.

Failure by him to comply would almost certainly provide the US and Britain
with a casus belli.

A UN security council source disclosed the outcome of a two-day meeting
of missile specialists commissioned by the UN weapons inspectors to
adjudicate on the Samoud and Fatah missiles. The source said: The verdict
on the missiles was that Al Samoud falls in the prohibited zone and its
engines should probably be destroyed.

The UN chief weapons inspector, Hans Blix, who is due to report to the
security council again tomorrow, revealed in his last report that Iraq had
exceeded its permitted range while testing its missiles. One of the missiles
was fired to 183 kilometres. Under the terms of the ceasefire agreement
reached after the 1991 Gulf war, Iraq had to destroy all nuclear, chemical
and biological weapons and missiles with a range exceeding 150km.

Iraq will argue that the extra 33km exceeded in the test is insignificant and
would not enable it to reach targets such as Israel and would thus refuse
to destroy the missile engines.

The development came only hours after France and Germany succeeded in
securing a brake on the push towards military action. Diplomatic sources
said yesterday the US and Britain have been outmanoeuvred in their push
for war by delaying a draft resolution, that would deliver a final ultimatum
to Iraq to disarm or face military action, until at least Tuesday.

Britain has been at the centre of crafting a resolution that was originally
intended to be presented to the security council tomorrow, after Mr Blix
delivers his report.

But the hardening stance of the French delegation, with the support of
Russia, Germany and China, has forced the UK and US to wait and gauge
fellow council members' reaction to the reports before deciding what
issues a resolution would need to address to win over the waverers.

We are looking at what kind of ultimatum would help so long as it doesn't
lead to a third resolution, said one diplomat. The likelihood that a draft
would be ready by tomorrow is increasingly unlikely, UN security council
sources said.

After tomorrow's meeting, diplomats believe there will be contacts
between capitals over the weekend and that a draft resolution presenting
an ultimatum will emerge on Tuesday or shortly after. Monday is a public
holiday in America.

The US has so far played very little part in helping to draft the resolution.
They don't see a legal need for it, said one security council source. But
politically they recognise it would be useful.

The defence secretary, Geoff Hoon, speaking in Washington after talks
with his US counterpart, Donald Rumsfeld, said: We have made clear we
want to see a second resolution. We regard that as being important
politically for our own position, but also to build as wide a coalition around
the world as we can ... If that second resolution were unreasonably
blocked in the security council, we would take the kind of action we took
in Kosovo, where we did not have a security council resolution.

The US and Britain can no longer be sure that France will not use its
security council veto.

The secretary of state, Colin Powell, said he would press France and
Germany to say how much more time they would give the arms inspectors
or whether they were only trying to get Iraq off the hook.

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2003
Forwarded for your information.  The text and intent of the article
have to stand on their own merits.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do
not believe simply because it has been handed down for many genera-
tions.  Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and
rumoured by many.  Do not believe in anything simply because it is
written in Holy Scriptures.  

[CTRL] Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | Guide to anti-war websites

[Euphorian]

-Caveat Lector-

http://www.guardian.co.uk/antiwar/subsection/0,12809,884056,00.html

A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A
DECLARATION  DISCLAIMER
==
CTRL is a discussion  informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.

Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]/A

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 A HREF=http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/;ctrl/A

To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

[CTRL] China Coming In for Landing

[Euphorian]

-Caveat Lector-

  Print this article |   Close this window
China may be trying to get off the fence
By Hamish McDonald, Herald Correspondent in Beijing
February 13 2003

Is China about to join the Axis of Weasels? A telephone conversation on
Tuesday night between French President Jacques Chirac and Chinese
President Jiang Zemin has set off a flurry of speculation that Beijing is
siding with a European push to delay the looming American-led attack on
Iraq.

After the talk, the Chinese official news agency Xinhua lost no time in
putting out a bulletin that Mr Jiang had expressed support for the French,
German and Russian declaration seeking reinforced United Nations
weapons inspections in Iraq, and to postpone a decision on military
intervention. We should try all means to avoid war, Mr Jiang was quoted
as saying.

If China is drifting to support the French position, after long signalling it
would abstain from opposing the United States over a military strike, then
the UN Security Council debate starting tomorrow could produce three
vetoes from among the five permanent members.

With this prospect, the US may then opt to attack Iraq without seeking a
second Security Council resolution giving explicit authorisation, and simply
claim a mandate flowing from the earlier one combined with Iraqi President
Saddam Hussein's inadequate response.

But the political embarrassment for America's coalition of the willing will
be deeper, particularly for Britain's Tony Blair and Australia's John Howard
who both face strong public opposition to intervention without a UN
mandate.

But who called whom on Tuesday night? The Xinhua report said Mr Chirac
called Mr Zemin. But China
analysts say that Beijing always reports that such phone calls originate
with the foreign party, partly to emphasise China's importance and partly
to downplay Chinese initiatives in case they go wrong.

Up to now, it has been considered likely that China will go along passively
with an American intervention, as it did in 1990 when it abstained from the
Security Council vote authorising the first Gulf War. Mr Jiang, who steps
down as president next month, has invested his prestige in an even
relationship with Washington, and made little demurral in his summit meet
with US President George Bush last October.

Energy-importer China has a big stake in Iraqi oil, also, having signed long-
term contracts with Baghdad that give it virtual ownership of huge
undeveloped oil fields in the country.

It would be worried that an irked US, running the post-Saddam occupation
of Iraq, might nullify contracts signed by the ousted regime.

But the wider Chinese leadership is uneasy at the spectacle of American
unilateralism and
deliberate regime-change, which Washington would be encouraged to
apply elsewhere - among China's peripheral friends like North Korea and
maybe Burma - if successful in Baghdad. The emergence of the French-
German-Russian opposition may be giving it a chance to hide in the
crowd putting a brake on the Americans.

The task of deciphering Chinese policy is made even more difficult by the
apparent contradictory approach with North Korea. With Iraq, Beijing
seeks a solution within the United Nations. With North Korea, it is urging
Washington to settle the nuclear weapons issue through direct bilateral
talks with Pyongyang rather that through a multilateral approach as the
Americans favour or by referring the issue to the security council.

This story was found at:
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/02/12/1044927663992.html
Forwarded for your information.  The text and intent of the article
have to stand on their own merits.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do
not believe simply because it has been handed down for many genera-
tions.  Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and
rumoured by many.  Do not believe in anything simply because it is
written in Holy Scriptures.  Do not believe in anything merely on
the authority of teachers, elders or wise men.  Believe only after
careful observation and analysis, when you find that it agrees with
reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all.
Then accept it and live up to it. The Buddha on Belief,
from the Kalama Sut

A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A
DECLARATION  DISCLAIMER
==
CTRL is a discussion  informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being 

[CTRL] Sharon can be tried

[Euphorian]

-Caveat Lector-

Wednesday, 12 February, 2003, 19:57 GMT
Belgium rules Sharon can be tried
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2754877.stm

Hundreds were killed in refugee camps

Belgium's highest appeals court has ruled

that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon could face war crimes charges, but
only after he leaves office.

The court was responding to an appeal by a group of 23 Palestinian
survivors of a massacre in Lebanon more than 20 years ago, when Mr
Sharon was Israel's defence chief.

The killings in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps were carried out by
Lebanese Christian militia allied to Israel, which then occupied southern
Lebanon.


The court overturned an earlier ruling
Israel withdrew its ambassador to Belgium for consultations in response
to the court ruling.

The suit was brought under Belgium's 1993 universal jurisdiction law,
which allows for the prosecution of alleged war crimes no matter where
they took place.

Last summer a lower court ruled that Mr Sharon could not be tried under
the law because he was not in Belgium, but the government has since
moved to amend the legislation.

The change, which allows for prosecution even if the defendant is not in
the country, is expected to be passed this spring.

Indirect responsibility

Mr Sharon was Israel's defence minister at the time of the killings at Sabra
and Shatila in 1982.

An Israeli investigation found Mr Sharon indirectly responsible for failing to
prevent the killings of between 800 and 2,000 refugees.

Mr Sharon was forced to resign from government but never faced charges
over the incident.


Mr Sharon resigned over the killings
In the run-up to the 2001 Israeli elections, he expressed regret about the
terrible tragedy at the refugee camps - but rejected any responsibility.

Besides Mr Sharon, war crimes proceedings have been brought in Belgium
against a number of world figures.

These include Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, Cuban President Fidel
Castro, Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and Ivory Coast President Laurent
Gbagbo.

But those trials were suspended in June, after the Brussels appeals court
ruling.

So far, the only people tried under Belgium's controversial war crimes law
are four Rwandans sentenced in 2001 for their role in the 1994 genocide of
the country's Tutsi ethnic minority.








Key stories
Israel's early
elections
Bombs and Labour
Israel seeks US cash
Hamas resurgent

Profiles
Ariel Sharon
Binyamin Netanyahu
Amram Mitzna
Yasser Arafat


FACTFILE

Voices from the

Conflict


TALKING POINT

What will stop the
suicide bombings?


AUDIO VIDEO

TV and Radio reports


See also:



13 Feb 02 | Middle East
Lebanon hears case
against Sharon

08 May 02 | Middle East
New 'evidence' in
Sharon trial

16 Apr 02 | Europe
Setback for Belgium war
crimes moves

24 Jan 02 | Middle East
Flashback: Sabra and
Shatila massacres

28 Nov 01 | Middle East
Court postpones Sharon
ruling

Internet links:



Palestinian National
Authority

Israeli Government

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

Top Middle East stories
now:


UN suspects Iraq over
missile range

'Bin Laden' tape raises
new tensions

Belgium rules Sharon
can be tried

Hajj continues under
strict watch

Israel clamps down on
Bethlehem

Mitzna sets conditions
for Israeli coalition

Iraqi opposition
condemns US plan

Papal envoy prepares
for Saddam meeting


Links to more Middle
East stories are at the foot of the page.






 E-mail this story to a friend
Forwarded for your information.  The text and intent of the article
have to stand on their own merits.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do
not believe simply because it has been handed down for many genera-
tions.  Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and
rumoured by many.  Do not believe in anything simply because it is
written in Holy Scriptures.  Do not believe in anything merely on
the authority of teachers, elders or wise men.  Believe only after
careful observation and analysis, when you find that it agrees with
reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all.
Then accept it and live up to it. The Buddha on Belief,
from the Kalama Sut

A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A
DECLARATION  DISCLAIMER
==
CTRL is a discussion  informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, 

[CTRL] WWII bombings

[Euphorian]

-Caveat Lector-

Germans stirred by new look at WWII bombings
http://jang.com.pk/thenews/feb2003-daily/12-02-2003/world/w5.htm
BERLIN: It was long considered impolite, unwise and even dangerously
nationalistic for Germans to question whether Allied bombings in World
War Two were necessary, legitimate or simply a war crime. Most had
tacitly accepted the victors' version of history that the firebombs which
killed 635,000 civilians and destroyed 130 cities hastened the demise of Nazi
Germany, weakened its war-time industry and shortened the war. But the
taboo has been shattered and the topic burst into the nation's
consciousness with a new book - The Fire - Germany and the
Bombardment 1940-1945 by historian Joerg Friedrich, which condemns the
attacks as war crimes and indirectly suggests that they may be comparable
to the Holocaust.

The book, climbing the German bestseller lists with more than 120,000
copies sold, claims the British-led attacks on German cities were a morally
dubious and militarily questionable campaign to turn the population against
Adolf Hitler. And with German opposition to a looming war in Iraq now
putting strains on NATO and Europe's relations with the United States, the
chilling account of the deaths of up to 40,000 civilians in a single February
1945 raid on Dresden has added further momentum to the country's
growing peace movement. It has also sparked a lively debate among
historians in Germany and Britain, where many criticise Friedrich for what
they call a lopsided narrative that fails to reflect the fact that Nazi
Germany was first to launch air strikes on civilians in Warsaw, Rotterdam,
Belgrade, London and Coventry.

Many other historians and newspapers, such as the conservative
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, have nevertheless praised the book as
pioneering for shedding new light on a long overlooked subject. Even Klaus
Naumann, commander of Germany's armed forces in the 1990s and retired
head of NATO's military planning committee, recently joined the debate by
saying the attacks on the civilian targets could not be justified. The
bombardment of German towns and cities that went on for five years
during World War Two has no parallel in history, Friedrich writes. More
than 1,000 cities and villages were bombed. Nearly a million tonnes of
explosives were dropped on 30 million civilians - mostly women, children
and the elderly.

Friedrich stops short of labelling Winston Churchill, Britain's war time prime
minister, a war criminal but uses emotionally loaded words to describe
the bombing, which began in 1940 as a retaliation against German attacks
on London. He says the attacks were supported by scientific research to
develop the most destructive fire storms to kill the greatest number of
civilians. Friedrich calls the attacks, which also cost 55,000 Allied pilots and
crew members their lives, a mass extermination and refers to the cellars
where cowering civilians were gassed to death as crematoriums. Such
language has drawn sharp criticism for the apparently intended comparison
with the Holocaust.

Friedrich's main accusation is that the most destructive Allied attacks came
in 1945 at a point when the war was already all but decided. He points out
that half of the 635,000 civilians who died were killed in raids in the final
nine months. He also notes that industrial output in Germany peaked in
mid-1944, suggesting the attacks barely dented the country's war
production. The question of whether Churchill was a war criminal can
never be answered because one never puts the victor on trial, said
Friedrich, 59. He has said in newspaper interviews that he hopes the book
might help Britain to take a more critical look at its wartime history. Do
you want to live in a nation which has to hide its own past because it
cannot look into the face of its past? You have to look into the face of the
past. Then you can ask if it was a heroic one, or tragic or perhaps
criminal, or if it included the necessary evils in a tragic time.

Excerpts of the book were reprinted in Bild, the country's best- selling
daily, and a series on it appeared in the leading Der Spiegel news magazine.
Its publication comes just months after Nobel prize winning author
Guenter Grass wrote a hugely popular book about the Wilhelm Gustloff, a
boat on which 9,000 German civilians were killed when it was torpedoed by
a Soviet submarine in 1945. But Friedrich's book has also drawn criticism
from British newspapers and historians as well as their counterparts in
Germany who attack it as a revisionist work that may pander to neo-Nazis
in Germany.

Critics also say the Berlin historian plays down the fact that Germany
started the war that cost some 60 million lives, its aircraft targeted civilians
first and Germany later launched deadly V1 and V2 rocket strikes on
civilians in London. Several have also criticised Friedrich for attempting to
portray Germans as victims of their own war. Friedrich's words come
dangerously close to 

[CTRL] Politics of War

[Euphorian]

-Caveat Lector-

TITLE: The Politics of War
by Walter Karp,
ISBN: 006012265X
Publisher: HarperCollins
Publish Date: June, 1979
Binding: Hardcover
List Price: USD 16.95

http://www3.addall.com/New/compare.cgi?dispCurr=USDid=236039isbn=
006012265Xlocation=1thetime=20030212232818
author=title=state=AK

A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A
DECLARATION  DISCLAIMER
==
CTRL is a discussion  informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.

Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]/A

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 A HREF=http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/;ctrl/A

To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

[CTRL] Bill O'Reilly's Fascism

[Euphorian]

-Caveat Lector-

January 22, 2003

How Alec Baldwin Outted the Fox Blowhard
http://www.counterpunch.org/gorman01222003.html
Bill O'Reilly's Fascism

By TOM GORMAN

Last year on a special broadcast, O'Reilly versus Hollywood (Fox News
Special, 6/7/02), Bill O'Reilly purported to take-on the phoniness of
entertainers who are politically active. Of particular pique to O'Reilly was a
comment from actor Alec Baldwin on a March episode of the now-defunct
Politically Incorrect. Responding to the idea that a President Gore would
have been less steadfast in his response to terrorism than President Bush,
Baldwin said: If you watched Fox [News] and all those other fascists over
there, that's exactly what they would have had you believe. O'Reilly
complained to entertainment journalist Jeanne Wolf (The O'Reilly Factor,
6/7/02) that if you're going to point fingers at people, and call them
names like Alec Baldwin said the Fox News Channel are fascists, . . . you've
got to back it up.

Two years ago, O'Reilly first offered his definition of fascism. Clinton
angered a lot of people out West with these executive orders that took
away a lot of land that people wanted to develop . . . and put it under the
federal system. Now, to me, that strikes- that's a little fascist, because . . .
here is a big monolith from Washington coming in, told the local folks. . . .
You can't go on this property and use it for any kind of concern, because
we're going to take it (The O'Reilly Factor, 1/22/01).

Earlier this month, O'Reilly gave an example of a fascist organization--the
American Civil Liberties Union. Interesting here are not his accusations off
the ACLU defending unpopular clients; this is an oft- repeated charge.
Being that the ACLU's mission is to defend principles regardless of the
group whose rights are being violated, O'Reilly's accusation is hardly
original. What does stand out is his further definition of fascism: In
Newton County, Georgia, the ACLU threatened a school board with
litigation if it didn't remove the words 'Christmas holiday' from the school
calendar. The county caved and removed the words because it couldn't
afford to defend the lawsuit. This, ladies and gentlemen, is fascism, that is,
using the threat of terror, which a lawsuit is, to promote policy (The
O'Reilly Factor, 1/2/03). If lawsuits, then, are terror, and using the threat
of terror is fascism, then, by O'Reilly's logic, the use of lawsuits is fascism.

The Seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution ensures that,
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed
twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact
tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United
States, than according to the rules of the common law. Suits at common
law are otherwise known as lawsuits. This is more colloquially referred to
as one's right to his or her day in court. This bedrock of American
contract law--the ability to seek redress in the judiciary for injury--is also
one of the foundations of capitalism. If individuals did not have the
opportunity to settle their grievances through the rule of law, the only
option left would be violent force. Arguably, might makes right comes
closer to most people's definition of fascism. Thus, we can deduce from
O'Reilly's logic that fascism encompasses both the rule of law and the
rule of force, a Hobson's choice between two kinds of terrorism in Bill
O'Reilly's estimation

If the federal government administering federal lands can be considered a
little fascist, or the ACLU enforcing First Amendment protections against
state- sponsored religion is fascism and the use of terror, then O'Reilly's
comments after the September 11 attacks surely must qualify for this
rubric as well: We should not target civilians. But if [the Afghans] don't
rise up against this criminal government [the Taliban], they starve, period,
and, What we can do is . . . say to those people, 'Look, we don't want to
do this. But either you get rid of this guy yourself, or you're just going to
have to starve to death because we're not going to let anybody in there'
(The O'Reilly Factor, 9/17/01).

The 1948 Genocide Convention (specifically, Article II(c): Deliberately
inflicting on [a national] group conditions of life calculated to bring about
its physical destruction in whole or in part, and Article III(c): Direct and
public incitement to commit genocide) was enacted in response to the
unambiguously fascist crimes of the Nazis. (Read the full text of the
Convention at http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/ p_genoci.htm. Note
that there is no exception to this law; even if you do not like the
government in a certain country, or if you believe that the country
harbors terrorists, genocide is still strictly forbidden.) Considering the
United States is a signatory to the Genocide Convention, and that Article
VI of the US Constitution makes all treaties entered into by the United
States the supreme