[CTRL] Debris May Have Hit Space Station
-Caveat Lector- Preparing us for the next NASA disaster? - JR http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2cid=624u=/ap/20031127/ap_on_sc/space_station_noiseprinter=1 Debris May Have Hit Space Station 1 hour, 21 minutes ago Add Science - AP to My Yahoo! By VLADIMIR ISACHENKOV, Associated Press Writer MOSCOW - The U.S.-Russian crew of the international space station (news - web sites) heard what sounded like a "tin can" being crushed against the outer hull, but Russian space officials said Thursday the men were safe and there were no immediate signs of any damage. A space official said the sound might have been produced by equipment on the station, but a spokesman for Russia's Space Forces attributed the noise to a brush with floating space junk. The station is manned by U.S. astronaut Michael Foale and Russian cosmonaut Alexander Kaleri. "It sounded like a metal tin can kind of being expanded and compressed," Foale said. "It was a noise that lasted about a second. It sounded like an impact or something." Foale and Kaleri continued their normal maintenance and research activities. They planned to observe Thanksgiving with a light work schedule and a meal that included turkey, chicken and rice. Valery Lyndin, a spokesman for Mission Control outside Moscow, said "all the station's systems are working normally" after the sound was reported early Wednesday. An inspection of the station's outer surface by outside cameras found no signs of damage, he told The Associated Press. Sergei Gorbunov, a spokesman for the Russian Aerospace Agency, said on NTV television the crew heard what "sounded as if a tin can was being crushed," but the ensuing check found no trace of impact. "The check made by the crew found no changes either in the equipment section or the atmosphere of the station, which would have changed instantly if the station's skin were punctured," Gorbunov said. The sound might have come from some of the station's equipment, not a collision, he said. However, a spokesman for the Russian Space Forces, which focus on monitoring the Russian satellite fleet but also keep track of the space station, said the station collided with a piece of space junk. The spokesman, who spoke to the Associated Press on condition of anonymity, said the space forces detected an object along the station's orbit. They determined that the object was very small and would pose no danger to the craft. Thousands of pieces of debris from spacecraft orbit the Earth, and the Space Forces monitor them to make sure there is no threat to the station or satellites. If a piece of debris is big enough to threaten damage, spacecraft are directed to safer orbits. www.ctrl.org 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://www.mail-archive.com/[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] Iraq war diverting resources from war on terror, experts say
Title: Iraq war diverting resources from war on terror, experts say -Caveat Lector- Dick Cheney and the neocons rammed this claim (that Iraq was the frontline in the war against terrorism) down the throats of the American public without a shred of public debate and against the best analysis and advice of the CIA, the DIAand most of the rest of the intel community. Cheney, Wolfowitz, Perle and Feith have never once been able to offer a rational explanation for why an American invasion and occupation of Iraq would make Americans safer against terrorist threats. The overwhelming evidence is that Bush's aggression against Iraq will increase terrorism, not decrease it. For the most part the American media have been criminally remiss in asking the most basic and simple questions about Bush's Iraq policy -- they are fully complicit with Bush and the neocons in creating the mess in Iraq and in increasing the terrorist threat against Americans. The only conceivable factor that could explain their behavior is an unstated emotional assumption that an American attack on Iraq, or on any Arab or Muslim nation, is good for Israel. But they are desperate to keep this motive completely hidden from public view. The entire Iraq operation has been shrouded in deception and deceit -- this is why the administrationhas beenforced to come up with new reasons for the policy on a daily basis, without ever addressing the real reason, which has its roots in the Clean Break paper that Richard Perle and his fellow neocons wrote for Benjamin Netanyahu back in 1996. -- SM Experts who have served in top positions in both Republican and Democratic administrations are increasingly suggesting that the Iraq war has diverted momentum, troops and intelligence resources from the worldwide campaign to destroy the remnants of al-Qaida. They note that the presence of U.S. troops in an Arab homeland is serving as a major recruiting tool for signing up and motivating new jihadis, or Islamic holy warriors. "Fighting Iraq had little to do with fighting the war on terrorism, until we made it (so)," said Richard Clarke, who was a senior White House counter-terrorism official under Bush and President Bill Clinton. http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/7357863.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp Posted on Wed, Nov. 26, 2003 Iraq war diverting resources from war on terror, experts sayBy Warren P. StrobelKnight Ridder Newspapers WASHINGTON - A growing number of counter-terrorism experts are challenging President Bush's assertion that Iraq is a major battle in the war against terrorism and are questioning whether the U.S. invasion of Iraq has hurt rather than helped the global battle against al-Qaida and its affiliates. Experts who have served in top positions in both Republican and Democratic administrations are increasingly suggesting that the Iraq war has diverted momentum, troops and intelligence resources from the worldwide campaign to destroy the remnants of al-Qaida. They note that the presence of U.S. troops in an Arab homeland is serving as a major recruiting tool for signing up and motivating new jihadis, or Islamic holy warriors. "Fighting Iraq had little to do with fighting the war on terrorism, until we made it (so)," said Richard Clarke, who was a senior White House counter-terrorism official under Bush and President Bill Clinton. There are few objective measures by which to judge the progress of the war on terror, something that makes it difficult to gauge whether the United States is winning or losing the battle. Bush administration officials note that much of al-Qaida's known top leadership has been caught or killed, but even Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, in a much-publicized memo that was leaked last month, said ways of measuring progress are almost nonexistent. "Today, we lack metrics to know if we are winning or losing the global war on terror," Rumsfeld wrote. Yet gauging the status of the war against al-Qaida has taken on fresh urgency with a series of deadly car bombings this month in Turkey and Saudi Arabia, and new threat warnings at home. The war on terror also appears destined to play a major role in next year's presidential
[CTRL] The Real Reason for the Iraq War (From the Archives)
Title: The Pollard Affair Never Ended -Caveat Lector- http://www.larouchepub.com/pr_lar/2002/090802pollard_affr.html PRESS RELEASE The Pollard Affair Never Ended! Sept. 8, 2002 (EIRNS)The following statement was released today by LaRouche in 2004, Lyndon LaRouche's campaign committee for the Democratic Presidential nomination. The statement is being circulated widely throughout the United States in leaflet form. Lyndon LaRouche reports that there is now firm evidence that the ongoing drive to induce President George W. Bush to launch a war against Iraq, is a 1996 Israeli government policy that is being foisted on the President by a nest of Israeli agents inside the U.S. government. This Israeli spy network inside the United States was unable achieve their objective until President Bush was entrapped by the events of Sept. 11, 2001 and the falsified accounts of those events provided by this foreign intelligence apparatus, and lured over to their policies. Lyndon LaRouche demands to know: Is this not the motive that explains the who and why of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001? LaRouche demands an immediate Congressional investigation, to help purge the U.S. government of this foreign intelligence apparatus, which attempted, with the 9/11 events, to seize control over U.S. foreign policy. The network of Pollard "stay-behinds" inside the Bush Administration is engaged in a witting hoax, to induce the President and the U.S. Congress to go to war. When you read the summary evidence below, you will certainly share Lyndon LaRouche's conclusion that all of these people must be immediately fired from their Administration posts, and that the U.S. Congress must launch public hearings to get to the bottom of this criminal scheme. The summary facts are as follows: On July 8, 1996, Richard Perle, now the Chairman of the Defense Policy Board, an advisory group that reports to Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, presented a written document to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, spelling out a new Israeli foreign policy, calling for a repudiation of the Oslo Accords and the underlying concept of "land for peace"; for the permanent annexation of the entire West Bank and Gaza Strip; and for the elimination of the Saddam Hussein regime in Baghdad, as a first step towards overthrowing or destabilizing the governments of Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. The document was prepared for the Jerusalem and Washington, D.C.-based Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies (IASPS), a think tank financed by Richard Mellon-Scaife. The report, "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm," was co-authored by Perle; Douglas Feith, currently the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Policy; David Wurmser, currently special assistant to State Department chief arms control negotiator John Bolton; and Meyrav Wurmser, now director of Mideast Policy at the Hudson Institute. Two days after he received the foreign policy blueprint from Perle, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu delivered a speech before a joint session of the U.S. Congress, which strongly echoed the IASPS outline. The same day, the Wall Street Journal published excerpts from the IASPS document, and the next day, July 11, 1996, the Journal editorially endorsed the Perle document. Beginning in February 1998, the British government of Prime Minister Tony Blair launched a concerted effort, in league with the Netanyahu government in Israel, and the Perle Israeli agent-of-influence networks inside the United States, to induce President William Clinton to launch a war against Iraq, under precisely the terms spelled out for Netanyahu in the "Clean Break" paper. The war was to be launched, ostensibly, over Iraq's possession of "weapons of mass destruction." United Nations weapons inspectors were, at this time, still on the ground inside Iraq. To buttress the war drive, British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook issued an official lying "white paper" on the Iraqi drive to obtain WMD. On Feb. 19, 1998, Richard Perle and former Congressman Stephen Solarz released an "Open Letter to the President," demanding a full-scale U.S.-led drive for "regime change" in Baghdad. The dangerously incompetent military scheme for the overthrow of Saddam that was published in the Open Letter, has been recently revived by the Perle-led network of "chickenhawks" in the office of Secretary of Defensebut has been summarily rejected by the
[CTRL] BBC Proves Israel MURDERED Rachel Corrie
-Caveat Lector- http://engforum.pravda.ru/showthread.php3?s=threadid=44899 BBC PROGRAM PROVES ISRAELI ARMY MURDERED RACHEL CORRIE By Christopher Bollyn American Free Press The BBC has released a remarkable film about the killing of three international peace activists by the Israeli army in the occupied Gaza Strip. Documentary evidence provided in the film strongly suggests that the American Rachel Corrie - and two British activists - were murdered. Last spring, within a period of seven weeks, one British and one American peace activist were killed by the Israeli army in Rafah, a Palestinian town at the southern end of the occupied Gaza Strip. A second Briton was shot in the head leaving him brain-dead. In two of the cases the Israeli army is being blamed for murder; the third is considered ?attempted murder.¦ An Israeli military bulldozer crushed the 23-year-old American peace activist Rachel Corrie, who was the first to die on March 16, as she tried to prevent it from demolishing a Palestinian doctor-s home. British photographer Tom Hurndall, 22, was left brain dead after being shot in the head by an Israeli soldier on April 11. British cameraman James Miller, 34, was shot by an Israeli sniper as he left a house with two other journalists on May 2. A recently released 50-minute ?hard-hitting¦ program produced by the British Broadcasting Corp. (BBC) investigated the three killings and provides crucial video evidence. ?That-s murder,¦ an Israeli soldier said after viewing footage from the film, ?When Killing is Easy.¦ ?When Killing is Easy¦ was shown 4 times to a worldwide audience on the commercial BBC World television network on November 22 and 23. Some cable television viewers in the United States would have been able to view the program. The three international observers died, or nearly died, at the hands of the Israeli military between the middle of March and the first week of May. Hurndall was shot in the head as he took a Palestinian toddler, who had frozen under Israeli fire, into his arms. Today, Hurndall is brain-dead and is kept alive on life-support equipment. Tom-s father, Anthony, is a lawyer in the City of London. After six weeks of investigation, Hurndall has come to the conclusion that the shooting of his son by Israeli forces is ?a case of attempted murder. If Tom dies, and that is a likelihood, then it will be murder,¦ he said. Jocelyn Hurndall wrote to The Guardian after an Israeli government check for about $12,000, sent to the Hurndall family to pay for ?a fraction of the expenses incurred,¦ bounced. When the check finally arrived after five months of negotiations with the Hurndall family, the Israeli government check was not ?honored¦ by the Bank of Israel, Hurndall wrote. ?Insufficient funds¦ was the reason given. According to evidence provided in Sweeney-s film, the IDF report on the shooting of Hurndall is completely wrong about where he was, what he was wearing, and what he was doing when an Israeli soldier shot him in the head. ?It is a mind-numbing task to understand the morality and to use the logic of the Israeli government,¦ Hurndall wrote. ?What hope do Palestinians have when such profound disregard and disrespect is shown to humanity, collectively and individually?¦ SILENCED WITNESSES The BBC film was produced by John Sweeney, whose article on the killings, ?Silenced Witnesses,¦ was published in The Independent (UK) on Oct. 30. ?Making our film, When Killing is Easy, has been the most harrowing ordeal of my professional life,¦ Sweeney wrote. ?But it is vital that it is evidential - and that is really tough when the Israeli government and the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) have refused to speak to us.¦ Rachel Corrie, the first of the three to die, was using her body to defend the home of Dr. Samir Nasser Allah from an American-made bulldozer used by the Israeli army to demolish the homes of Palestinians. Corrie was a member of the International Solidarity Movement (ISM). ISM members stand between the Israeli bulldozers and the homes that the IDF wants to flatten. Israeli bulldozers have razed thousands of Palestinian homes in the occupied Gaza Strip and the West Bank. The bulldozers are primarily made by the Illinois-based Caterpillar company. Tom Dale, an ISM eyewitness, had a clear view of the incident: ?He [the driver] knew absolutely she was there. The bulldozer waited for a few seconds over her body and it then reversed, leaving its scoop down so that if she had been under the bulldozer, it would have crushed her a second time. Only later when it was much more clear of her body did it raise its scoop.¦ ?MY BACK IS BROKEN¦ ?My back is broken,¦ Rachel told Alice Coy, a fellow ISM activist who was with her. An Israeli pathologist, Dr. Yehudah Hiss, noted that Rachel appeared to have been run over by the bulldozer, Sweeney wrote. Hiss found the cause of death to be ?pressure to the chest.¦ Her shoulder blades had been crushed; her
[CTRL] Mossad The JFK Assassination (1 of 2)
-Caveat Lector- http://feralnews.com/issues/jfk/piper/piper.html Final Judgment: the Missing Link in the JFK Assassination Conspiracy Since November 22, 1963 many have spent vast amounts of time researching the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, putting forth a wide variety of theories. Most of the research has been devoted to what one more perceptive critic described as "a consuming preoccupation [with] the microanalytic searching for facts of how the assassination was accomplished," while at the same time, he points out "there has been almost no systematic thinking on why President Kennedy was killed." So while people have focused on how many assassins were involved, and how many shots they fired at JFK and where the shots came from and where the bullets hit, the real question of who was ultimately responsible for the assassination-not who fired the bullets, but who sponsored the assassins who fired those bullets-has been ignored. Thus, to find out who is responsible for JFK's murder, we have to find out WHY he was murdered-what motivated those who orchestrated his assassination. Consider the wide-ranging array of suspects that have been put forth: Lee Harvey Oswald, acting alone; The Soviet KGB; Fidel Castro; Anti-Castro Cubans; The "Mafia"; Rogue CIA operatives and anti-Castro Cubans in collaboration with elements of "the Mafia"; J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI; Lyndon Baines Johnson; Former Nazi intelligence officers; The Texas Oil Barons; and The Military-Industrial Complex. Ten years ago, in 1992, a new suspect was added to the list. Former Rep. Paul Findley (R-Ill.) made the little-noticed but intriguing comment in the March 1992 issue of The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs that "it is interesting but not surprising to note that in all the words written about the assassination of John F. Kennedy, Israel's intelligence agency, the Mossad, has never been mentioned, despite the obvious fact Mossad complicity is as plausible as any of the other theories." What Findley did not know was at that very time I was in the process of preparing a volume contending that the Mossad role alongside the CIA in the JFK assassination, was, in fact, the big secret-the "missing link"-that explained the entirety of the JFK conspiracy. The Mossad role is what I have also called "the secret picture on the other side of the jigsaw puzzle" of the JFK assassination conspiracy. My book summarizing this theory is entitled Final Judgment. What I find quite remarkable is that while many Israelis today believe that Israeli intelligence played a part in the assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, many of Israel's friends in America have reacted quite hysterically to my contention that the Mossad played a role in the assassination of America's president. In addition, although there are many who believe that the CIA had a hand in the JFK assassination, quite a few of those same people are fearful of mentioning the likelihood of a Mossad role. Yet, as journalist Andrew Cockburn has pointed out: "There has been since almost the earliest days of the Israeli state and the earliest days of the CIA a secret bond, basically by which Israeli intelligence did jobs for the CIA and for the rest of American intelligence. You can't understand what's been going on with American covert operations and the Israeli covert operations until you understand this secret arrangement." Cockburn's words are a rough overview of the thesis that I have presented in Final Judgment. Although Final Judgment has never been in any major bookstore since it was first published nearly a decade ago, some 30,000 copies are in circulation-more copies than more widely-publicized books on the topic. It is truly an "underground best-seller." It is now in its 760-page fifth edition, documented with 1,114 footnotes. And on November 9, Dar El Ilm Lilmalayin, the oldest and largest privately-owned publishing house in the Middle East released the first-ever Arabic-language edition. In many respects, Final Judgment is more than a book about the JFK assassination. It also reveals the hidden global power politics of the last half of the 20th century. Final Judgment documents that in 1963 JFK was embroiled in a bitter secret conflict with Israeli leader David Ben-Gurion over Israel's drive to build the atomic bomb; that Ben-Gurion resigned in disgust, saying that because of JFK's policies, Israel's "existence [was] in danger." Then upon JFK's assassination, U.S. policy toward Israel began an immediate 180-degree turnaround. Israeli historian Avner Cohen's new book, Israel and the Bomb, confirms the conflict between JFK and Israel so powerfully that, Israel's Ha'aretz, declared Cohen's revelations would "necessitate the rewriting of Israel's entire history." In any case, Cohen pointed out, "the transition from Kennedy to [Lyndon] Johnson . . . benefited the Israeli nuclear program." Ethan Bronner, in the New York
[CTRL] Mossad The JFK Assassination (2 of 2)
-Caveat Lector- http://feralnews.com/issues/jfk/piper/piper.html Green writes: "In the early years of the Johnson administration the Israeli nuclear weapons program was referred to in Washington as 'the delicate topic.' Lyndon Johnson's White House saw no Dimona, heard no Dimona, and spoke no Dimona when the reactor went critical in early 1964." Thus it was that the critical point of dispute between John F. Kennedy and the Mossad-dominated government of Israel was no longer an issue. The new American president-so long a partisan of Israel-allowed the nuclear development to continue. This was just the beginning. There is an aside to all of this that should be noted: Final Judgment documents a Peking connection to the JFK assassination conspiracy, relating directly to Israel's secret nuclear allliance with China. Not only U.S. policy toward Israel reversed upon JFK's assassination. Although it's virtually forgotten, John F. Kennedy was planning a military assault on Red China's nuclear weapons development facilities in the months prior to his assassination. However, one month after JFK's death, Lyndon Johnson canceled the project and allowed China to proceed with the assembly of its nuclear arsenal. The big secret is that at the time of JFK's assassination, Israel's Mossad and Red China's intelligence service were working behind the scenes on joint nuclear weapons development. The evidence suggests that "the China card" played a critical (secret) factor in Israel's participation in the JFK assassination conspiracy. In fact, the longtime Mossad liaison between Israel and Red China, Shaul Eisenberg, a key player in Israel's nuclear weapons program, was part of the Permindex web linked to the JFK assassination. This is documented in detail in Final Judgment. Where, you ask, does the CIA fit alongside the Mossad in the JFK assassination? By 1963 John F. Kennedy was not only at war with Israel and the Meyer Lansky Organized Crime Syndicate, but he was also at war with their close ally in the international intelligence underworld-the CIA. Final Judgment shows that Israel's chief contact at the CIA, the Soviet-hating James Jesus Angleton, ultimately played a pivotal role in the JFK assassination conspiracy cover-up. In light of the Angleton connection, I should note how he worldwide media has given great play to the release of a new book that purported to "prove" that it was the Soviet KGB that concocted the story that the CIA was behind the assassination of John F. Kennedy. The book purported to be the inside history of the KGB's secret intelligence operations in the U.S. and Europe The Sword and the Shield by Professor Christopher Andrew of Cambridge-described as "one of the world's leading authorities on intelligence history,". The book was said to be based on extensive notes and transcriptions of vast numbers of files from the KGB archives. The notes themselves were supposedly smuggled out of KGB headquarters by former KGB archivist Vasili Mitrokhin who retired from the KGB in 1984 and who then defected to Britain in 1992 after the CIA had rejected Mitrokhin. The problem with the Andrew book is this: while it is quite thoroughly footnoted, with hundreds of references to a wide-ranging amount of material, it is not always clear whether Andrew is purporting to cite the Mitrokhin archives as his source or whether the information he presents is Andrew's own interpretation. While the book is quite skilfully written in such a way that it appears to present the information as having come from the KGB's supposedly purloined file, that is not always necessarily the case. It appears Andrew's book some sort of effort to counter new official histories of the KGB being released by the KGB's post-Soviet era successor, the SVR. For example, Andrew lashes out at Lolly Zamoysky, the SVR's literary editor of the new multi-volume official history, as having been "well known" in the KGB "for his belief in a global Masonic-Zionist plot." Thus, Andrew's book is effectively an attempt to counter allegations of high-level Zionist intrigue that has been documented by the official post-KGB Russian intelligence services. In that regard, it is remarkable to note that in the entirety of this 700-page volume, there is only one indexed reference to Israel and not a single indexed reference to the Mossad, despite the widely-known fact that the Mossad played a central role alongside the CIA in its operations throughout the period that Andrew has purported to describe. Likewise, there are only two indexed references to the CIA's longtime counterintelligence chief, James Jesus Angleton, even though Angleton, best remembered for his strident anti-Soviet stance, having spent decades looking for a "KGB mole" in the upper echelons of the CIA and in allied Western intelligence agencies-was also a devoted Israeli loyalist who jealously guarded his role as the CIA's liaison to the Mossad. Perhaps the most glaring
[CTRL] Evidence indicates that Wellstone crash was no accident (Jim Fetzer)
Title: One man's opinion: Evidence indicates that Wellstone crash was no accident -Caveat Lector- http://www.duluthsuperior.com/mld/duluthtribune/news/opinion/7306797.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp Posted on Thu, Nov. 20, 2003 Point of View by JIM FETZEROne man's opinion: Evidence indicates that Wellstone crash was no accident Minnesota Sen. Paul Wellstone was a serious man who cared profoundly about his fellow citizens. He took courageous stands against an administration that he viewed with profound suspicion, arguing eloquently against tax cuts for the rich, the subversion of the Constitution, and violating international accords. He would have led the opposition to the war in Iraq if only he had had the chance. Everyone knew it and he may have died because of it. For nearly a year now, evidence has been accumulating about the event that ended the life of this magnificent human being. Whatever caused the crash was not the plane, the pilots or the weather. In spite of what you may have heard, the plane was exceptional, the pilots well-qualified and the weather posed no significant problems. Even the National Transportation Safety Board's own simulations of the plane, the pilots and the weather were unable to bring the plane down. This means we have to consider other, less palatable, alternatives, such as small bombs, gas canisters or electromagnetic pulse, radio frequency or High Energy Radio Frequency weapons designed to overwhelm electrical circuitry with an intense electromagnetic field. An abrupt cessation of communication between the plane and the tower took place at about 10:18 a.m., the same time an odd cell phone phenomenon occurred with a driver in the immediate vicinity. This suggests to me the most likely explanation is that one of our new electromagnetic weapons was employed. The politics of the situation were astonishing. The senator was pulling away from the hand-picked candidate of the Bush machine. Its opportunity to seize control of the U.S. Senate was slipping from its grasp. Its vaunted "invincibility" was being challenged by an outspoken critic of its most basic values. Targeted for elimination, he was going to survive. Here's one man's opinion: Under such conditions, the temptation to take him out may have been irresistible. Among the striking indications that something was wrong with the NTSB in its inquiry into the causes of the crash is that Carol Carmody, a former employee with the CIA, the head of the team, announced the day after that the FBI had found no indications of terrorist involvement. Yet it is the responsibility of the NTSB to ascertain the cause of the crash, which has yet to be determined to this very day. So how could the FBI possibly know? The FBI's prompt arrival was peculiar. As Christopher Bollyn of American Free Press reported (www.rumormillnews.net, Oct. 29, 2002), "According to Rick Wahlberg, then St. Louis County sheriff, a team of FBI agents was quickly on the crash site about noon, less than an hour after (assistant manager Gary) Ulman and the (fire) chief had first located the site and found a way to access the wreck. This FBI team had come from the distant Twin Cities in record time!" When Bollyn "asked Ulman if he had notified the FBI about the accident, Ulman said he had not spoken with the bureau at any time. Asked how the FBI got to the site so quickly, Ulman said that he assumed they had come from Duluth. AFP contacted the Duluth office of the FBI and was told that the team of 'recovery' agents had not come from Duluth but had traveled from the FBI office in Minneapolis." I calculate that this team would have had to have left the Twin Cities at about the same time the Wellstone plane was taking off. Gary Ulman confirmed to me that the FBI had been on the scene no later than 1 p.m. I have reviewed the log books maintained by the Sheriff's Department at Eveleth and have discovered that they are grossly incomplete and cannot confirm when the FBI showed up.
[CTRL] Deadly suppositions
-Caveat Lector- http://www.rationalreview.com/rlwrights/112603.shtml Deadly suppositions by R. Lee Wrights "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." -- Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution Have you ever been accused of something you did not do? Or even worse, have you ever been punished for something you did not do? Did your Mom ever spank you or ground you for something one of your siblings had done? Have you ever been fired from a job because you got the blame for someone else's mistake? Do you know what it feels like to be judged guilty of some crime or misdemeanor just because someone suspected you of doing something wrong? If you can answer yes to any of these questions then you have experienced injustice first hand. You have known the pain that can only be alleviated by the promise held within our Constitution that a person cannot "... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." Presumption of innocence is the very cornerstone of American justice; it serves as a guarantee that no person can be punished on mere supposition based on nothing more than suspicion. Now, while all of this is fresh in your mind I want you read this lead-in to a news report entitled "U.S. levels houses of Iraqi insurgents" that I saw in the November 18th edition of CNN.com, and see if you can spot the injustice. "The U.S. military has begun leveling houses and buildings used by suspected Iraqi guerrilla fighters in a new tactic which is part of a more aggressive strategy aimed at crushing the anti-American insurgency, Pentagon officials said Tuesday." That's right. American troops are now being used to destroy private property of "suspected Iraqi guerrilla fighters." What happened to requiring proof before depriving someone of "life, liberty, or property" as stated in our own Constitution? Evidently that does not apply to people we attack so that we can bring them our way of life. Apparently if you live in Iraq, under American rule, all that is required for you to lose everything you own is to be "suspected" of wrongdoing. And the Pentagon is not being shy about this deadly departure from the very ideals we are supposed to be instilling in the Iraqi citizens. A Pentagon spokesman told CNN in the same article: "Coalition forces are continuing to target any building that may be used by anti-coalition forces to plan attacks, produce weapons or harbor insurgents." Did he really say "any" building that "may" be used by anti-coalition forces? That seems to conveniently include any building in the whole damn country! I mean any building "may" be used for one thing or the other, right? It can apply to literally any structure in the country regardless of who owns the property. This is the "American way" Iraqi citizens are learning about up close and personal. Don't care for your neighbor? Just tell the Americans that you suspect he is using his home for anti-American shenanigans and -- BOOM -- no more neighbor. The guy around the corner giving you a hard time? All you have to do is tell the Americans that he may be using his property for anti-coalition activities and -- BOOM -- the guy around the corner is history. Isn't freedom great? No wonder a growing number of Iraqi citizens say it is hard to tell the difference between life under Saddam Hussein's thumb and life under the thumb of George Bush. To make matters worse, the Pentagon tries to put a good face on the whole affair by pointing out how careful they have been about the operations. CNN reports that: "Pentagon officials stressed that in all cases, the U.S. has gone to 'extraordinary means' to notify civilians that they need to evacuate the area before any attacks were carried out. And before any building was destroyed, nearby roads were closed to minimize the chance of unintended civilian casualties. The United States has used a number of methods to destroy buildings, everything from tanks to air strikes." So we will go out of our way to make sure that citizens are out of harm's way while we destroy their homes; but, we can't be bothered with actually going to the trouble of producing evidence against someone before we blow up everything they have probably worked their whole lives to obtain. All the justification we need to run a tank through someone's living room is a suspicion that they are the enemy or an enemy sympathizer. But, at least we will clear out the
Re: [CTRL] Christ as a myth
-Caveat Lector- To - Bill. First- Jesus Christ hasalways been in my life - second - you`re calling me a fanatic??? I haven`t called you names or cut you down as you have me - third - this WHOLE world revolves around three things - money, power, and RELIGION - fourth - for some reason Jesus Christ hits a real bad sore spot with you - and fifth - just what is it that you DO believe? M Maurer a soldier for Jesus Christ www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsis 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://www.mail-archive.com/[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
Re: [CTRL] Christ as a myth
-Caveat Lector- In a message dated 11/27/2003 4:17:48 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: for some reason Jesus Christ hits a real bad sore spot with you - and fifth - just what is it that you DO believe? M Maurer a soldier for Jesus Christ No sore spot. Believe what you want...just don't push it on others or claim to have the sole "truth." I could care less what fairy tales you believe in. I am into reality, not fable. Bill. www.ctrl.org 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://www.mail-archive.com/[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
Re: [CTRL] Christ as a myth
-Caveat Lector- On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 11:00, you wrote: -Caveat Lector- In a message dated 11/27/2003 4:17:48 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: for some reason Jesus Christ hits a real bad sore spot with you - and fifth - just what is it that you DO believe? M Maurer a soldier for Jesus Christ No sore spot. Believe what you want...just don't push it on others or claim to have the sole truth. I could care less what fairy tales you believe in. I am into reality, not fable. Bill. Bill, See thats a bit more civil now, very nice to see. Although the fairy tale bait was a bit much... but better none the less. www.ctrl.org 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://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=http://www.mail-archive.com/[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 -- Regards, Daniel Harrison www.ctrl.org 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://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=http://www.mail-archive.com/[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] EU redraft robs Britain of foreign policy veto
-Caveat Lector- Will Blair dare to push this through the parliament without a vote of the people? -JR http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/11/27/weu27.xmlsSheet=/news/2003/11/27/ixworld.html/news/2003/11/27/weu27.xml EU redraft robs Britain of foreign policy vetoBy Ambrose Evans-Pritchard in Brussels(Filed: 27/11/2003) A change of wording in the latest draft of the European Constitution published yesterday would strip Britain of its veto in all areas of foreign policy. Ignoring warnings that the Government is prepared to veto the text unless major changes are made, legal experts in Brussels and Rome have stepped up the pressure on Britain and offered little beyond "declaratory" gestures in the fields of taxation, social security, criminal justice and energy policy. The latest version, released in advance of a tough bargaining session in Naples this weekend, empowers the EU to decide foreign policy by qualified majority voting for the first time. The dramatic change is tucked away in Article III-201 on the role of the new EU foreign minister. The original text limited majority voting to minor details but a tweak in the language extends it to all policy initiatives launched by the EU foreign minister, which can cover anything. The only safeguard is an "emergency brake" that allows any state in extremis to invoke "vital" national interests, but this too can be overruled by a majority vote. To make matters worse, a lower threshold for qualified majority voting will make it much harder for a grouping of states to block decisions. The only area of real progress for Britain is in defence. Now the EU military vanguard, the defence equivalent of the euro-zone, will be open to all EU states with viable military forces. But it is still not clear what dissenting states can do to prevent the bloc going to war if they disagree. London is delighted that a "mutual defence"' clause has been scrapped as part of a re-wording to ensure that Nato remains the foundation of European defence. A Foreign Office spokesman said the change was "totally unacceptable" and had no chance of surviving in the final text. EU diplomats said Ireland, the Nordic states and almost all the new Eastern Europe members would put up a fight. Even the French have doubts after finding themselves in a minority over the Iraq war. The new text was prepared by a team of Brussels insiders under the guidance of the Italian presidency. It does not begin to address the most intractable issues. These are: whether every small state should have its own commissioner; whether Poland and Spain should retain their "big power" status secured in the Nice Treaty and whether God makes it into the Preamble. Despite elegant attempts to finesse controversy, the text fails to meet almost all of the British "red lines" spelled out in a White Paper this autumn. The veto is still under threat in criminal justice, though a clause has been added to highlight the distinctiveness of English and Irish "common law". The text still calls for qualified majority voting over tax fraud issues - seen by critics as a Trojan horse for broader tax harmonisation - areas of social security and Britain's budget rebate. So far London has failed to secure any change in a catch-all clause that gives Brussels the power to co-ordinate the economic and employment policy of member states. North Sea oil, which makes up over 90 per cent of the EU's oil reserves, is still vulnerable to a Brussels take-over. A totally new "revision clause" has been added allowing ministers to ram through future changes to the bulk of the constitution by qualified majority voting. A senior EU diplomat called the manoeuvre "barking mad". 26 November 2003: Britain expects to get its way on 'red lines' 25 November 2003: Britain threatens veto on EU 24 November 2003: Blair faces battle over EU defence 16 October 2003: Queen raises fears over EU constitution Information appearing on telegraph.co.uk is the copyright of Telegraph Group Limited and must not be reproduced in any medium without licence. For the full copyright statement see Copyright www.ctrl.org 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.
