[CTRL] Out of the Armey Now
-Caveat Lector- From http://www.dfw.com/mld/startelegram/news/columnists/dave_lieber/4288050.htm Posted on Tue, Oct. 15, 2002 Nothing fond about farewell to Armey Dave Lieber commentary A congressman from our area, House Majority Leader Dick Armey, R-Flower Mound, is a tacky man. In less than three months, he will be out of office, and we will no longer have to listen to his stupid comments. His son, Scott Armey, who could not win the House seat even though he shares his daddy's name, will still be a federal employee, thanks to political patronage. But neither father nor son will be an elected official, and for that, we should say a small prayer of thanks. What motivates my call for prayer? Dick Armey's latest stunt. Still fuming over a series that The Dallas Morning News published on the eve of his son's loss in the Republican primary in April, Armey tried to pull an unbelievable power play this month. He attempted to insert language into a military appropriations bill that would have forced the Morning News' parent company, Belo, to sell one of its three media properties in the region. His Belo-related amendment alluded to, but did not name, these Belo properties: WFAA/Channel 8, the Morning News and the Denton Record- Chronicle. Armey's amendment stated that any media company that owns a network-affiliated TV station; a newspaper with a Sunday circulation of at least 750,000 that doesn't have a competitor with a Sunday circulation exceeding 350,000; and a second daily newspaper with a Sunday circulation of 25,000 or less -- all in the same market -- would have to divest the smallest property. That type of vague language is how lawmakers have historically inserted last-minute amendments that aid cronies or target enemies. Therefore, in celebration of Armey's pending retirement, I suggest that the following amendments -- based on incidents culled from his career -- be inserted into bills: The Mispronounced Name Amendment: Applies to any congressional leader who in 1995 referred to an openly gay congressman with a term that rhymes with rag. The leader shall be forced to wear, for an entire year, a rainbow-colored tie with the words Ask me what my first name is. The Fool-Me-Twice-Shame-on-You Amendment: Applies to any congressional leader who apologized for the above incident and then in 2000 made another derogatory joke about the same congressman. The leader shall be forced to do aerobics exercises with Richard Simmons on live television. The Failed Coup Amendment: Pertains to any top House leader who tried to orchestrate the ouster in 1997 of his boss, then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich, and, when asked about it later, did not tell the truth about his role. The leader shall be forced to tell the story of George Washington and the cherry tree to every first-grader in Flower Mound. The Thanks for the Memories Amendment: Applies to any congressional leader who spread a false report on the House floor that comedian Bob Hope had died. The leader shall be forced to serve as an unpaid intern for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., for no less than one year. The False Pretenses Fund-raiser: Relates to any congressional leader who had a fund- raiser for his re-election campaign on Dec. 6 with Vice President Dick Cheney in Dallas, then announced six days later that he had no intention of running again. The leader shall repay, with interest, the more than $400,000 his campaign received from contributors. The Misleading Signs Amendment: Pertains to any congressional leader whose son has lost a primary to replace him in Congress. If supporters put up signs stating Support the Armey Flat Tax to confuse voters into thinking that the father was running for re-election, the congressional leader shall remove the nails from each wood stake using his front teeth. The Father-Son Nepotism Amendment: Relates to any congressman who helped get his son a job as the regional administrator for the General Services Administration in a city whose name is Fort Worth. If the father and son said afterward that the son got the plum patronage job on his own merits, then the congressional leader shall be forced to tell the story of George Washington and the cherry tree to every second-grader in Flower Mound. You get the idea. Dick Armey's career has been one long comic routine of cheap tricks, half- truths and foolish remarks. In a few months, the area will start fresh with a new congressman who can restore dignity to the office as the people's representative. Good riddance. Dave Lieber's Column Appears Sundays, Tuesdays and Fridays. (817) 685-3830 [EMAIL PROTECTED] © 2001 startelegram and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved. http://www.dfw.com ~~~ AER + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forwarded as information only; I don't believe everything I read or send (but that doesn't stop me from considering it; obviously SOMEBODY thinks
[CTRL] Sharon Doctrine for Iraq?
-Caveat Lector- From http://www.iht.com/articles/73960.html Copyright © 2002 The International Herald Tribune | www.iht.com American policymakers awash in fantasy William Pfaff IHT Thursday, October 17, 2002 Re-educate the Iraqis? PARIS Even before the newspaper reports of a plan for lasting military occupation of Iraq, on the model of the post-World War II occupation of Japan, the debate over war with Iraq was awash with unchecked fantasies about the future. The debate has mostly consisted of unproved assertions about Iraq's weapons or lack of them; about the threat that it does, or does not, pose to its neighborhood or Israel or the United States; and about its connection, or lack of connection, with international terrorism. It is a highly emotional argument untroubled by much fact. The outcome will apparently be decided by whoever last has the president's ear. The Senate, constitutional custodian of the power to go to war, has abdicated to George W. Bush, conceding to him greater discretion than to any president in history. This is not the conduct of a serious government or a serious nation. War is a grave matter even for a country that fancies itself invincible. One does not attack another society, inflict destruction upon it, kill its soldiers and people and send one's own soldiers to death on the basis of speculation, hypothesis and partisan theories about the future. The United States has never before gone to war without a clear and factually uncontroversial casus belli. In the Gulf War it was Iraq's aggression against Kuwait. In Vietnam it was Communist insurrection against a recognized government. The merits of America's intervention in these wars were certainly controversial, but the facts of aggression, and the facts of insurrection, were there. Today there is as yet no incontrovertible fact that justifies war against Iraq. That is why there is such a controversy. Sending the United Nations inspectors back might produce some facts to replace speculation. Bush supporters now have offered a new theory about American-led peaceful revolution in the region, its democratization and peaceful economic transformation, with reform of Islamic religious thought so as to reconcile Islam with modern Western culture. The newly disclosed plan for military occupation of a defeated Iraq makes up part of this theory. The occupation will reform and re-educate Iraq, supposedly in the way imperial Japan and Nazi Germany were remade after 1945. Only people who know little about Japan and Germany in the 1940s could make such an assumption. Historical ignorance, however deplorable, is not considered an impediment to policy-making in today's Washington. But the people putting these ideas forward cannot pretend to be ignorant of political Washington, the nature and preoccupations of the U.S. Congress today and the temper of American public opinion. The numbers offered in Washington concerning such a military occupation are between 75,000 and 100,000 troops. This is roughly one-fifth of the total personnel of the existing regular army of the United States. And The cost of an occupation is estimated at some $16 billion per year. That is more than 4 percent of the total U.S. military budget for fiscal 2003, including the post-Sept. 11 Bush administration's military budget increase. There is no possibility whatever that the American government and public would make such a commitment of men and money to Iraq. Would other countries pay? Not if there had been no United Nations mandate for the war. Europe after 1945 simply needed to have its economy rebuilt. That is what Marshall Plan money accomplished. The Marshall Plan did not reform or transform European society, nor was it expected to do so. Japan, like Europe, had an advanced industry in 1941. It would not otherwise have been able to put up a ferocious three-and-a-half-year defense against American offensives in the Central and Southwestern Pacific and against the British/Indian advance in South Asia. Japan in 1945 was also an intensely corporate, authoritarian and hierarchical society. By leaving the emperor in place, and acting with his consent and authority, the MacArthur occupation was able to conduct a peaceful reform of the Japanese government, economy and educational system. The Japanese authorities policed the country, not the American occupation. There was no resistance. Would there be resistance to American occupation of Iraq? It is another agreeable fantasy to think that American soldiers would be cheered as they arrived, and be encouraged by the Iraqis to take over their country. What would George W. Bush do, though, if the Iraqi army put up a serious fight, and if the Iraqi public resisted an American occupation? What Ariel Sharon is doing? International Herald Tribune Los Angeles Times Syndicate International Copyright © 2002 The International Herald Tribune ~~~ AER + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
[CTRL] [www.washtimes.com] Historical Hyperbole Hollowed
-Caveat Lector- [EMAIL PROTECTED] has sent you an article from The Washington Times. --- PAINTED IN COLORS TOO STARK Patrick J. Buchanan --- As two . . . sitting senators who served in World War II, we see the next Hitler in Saddam Hussein. So write Ted Stevens and John Warner in a column titled, Hitler's Disciple in Baghdad, in The Washington Times. And they recall for us the history of the run-up to that war: Hitler ignored the surrender agreements after World War I. He flaunted [sic] the Versailles peace treaty and the League of Nations, which was formed to maintain world peace. A modest dissent: Germany did not surrender in World War I. It agreed to an armistice on Wilson's 14 Points, laid down its arms, and sent its High Seas Fleet to the British base at Scapa Flow. And Versailles was no agreement. It was a Carthaginian peace, a dictat, imposed on a disarmed Germany at the point of a million bayonets, during a starvation blockade. Germany was told if it did not sign the treaty that stripped it of a tenth of its land and 8 million people, Marshal Foch would march on Berlin. Any law student will tell you a contract signed at the point of a gun is invalid. Indeed, Hitler first won power democratically on a pledge to overthrow the Versailles regime, which, as America and Britain had come to recognize by 1933, had been as unwise as it was unjust. Hitler did walk out of the League of Nations. But leaving was no more a crime than America's refusal to join in 1919. Not a few Senate Republicans in 1919 believed the League of Nations had been set up to preserve, not world peace, but a British empire that had gobbled up the lion's share of Germany's colonies after a war America had fought to make the world safe for democracy. Hitler's decision to rearm Germany was a breach of Versailles, but his decision to build a navy one-third the size of the Royal Navy was happily assented to by the British government in negotiations. [Hitler] occupied the Rhineland and invaded Austria. No one tried to stop him, write Messrs. Stevens and Warner. True, Hitler's remilitarization of the Rhineland was a breach of Versailles and the Locarno Pact he had agreed to honor. But if France did not think German soldiers on German soil west of the Rhine was worth a war, why should America, which had rejected Versailles and was never a party to Locarno? As for the Anschluss with Austria, no one tried to stop Hitler in 1938. But in 1934, when Nazi thugs murdered Chancellor Dollfuss and attempted a coup, someone did. Mussolini sent troops to the Brenner Pass, flew to Vienna in a show of solidarity with Austria, and invited the British and French to Stresa, Italy, to join in a united front to force Hitler to abide by Versailles and Locarno. Mussolini, however, thought he had gotten Allied approval to avenge Italy's 1896 defeat at Adowa in Abyssinia, modern-day Ethiopia. But when he invaded Haile Selassie's slave empire, London and Paris put League of Nations morality and moral clarity ahead of vital interests and led the League of Nations in imposing sanctions on their Stresa partner. Thus, when Hitler sent troops into the Rhineland in 1936, and Paris and London sought Italy's support, Mussolini, sanctioned and insulted by his old friends, had found a new one in Berlin. In September of 1939, the world watched him invade Poland, the senators write. Not so. Stalin joined Hitler in the invasion and brutally occupied eastern Poland. Britain and France declared war. Why? Because they had rashly and insanely given war guarantees to the Warsaw regime of the dissolute Col. Beck, who had collaborated with Hitler in the rape of Czechoslovakia. The forgotten truths of 1919-1939? Munich was not the only, nor even the worst blunder. Versailles had made another war inevitable. Britain should have put moral clarity on the shelf and looked out for its vital interests first. Its war guarantee to Poland did not save Poland, it only turned Hitler to the west. Thus, Western Europe was overrun, 50 million people perished, and Stalin emerged triumphant with 10 more Christian countries enslaved. We see the next Hitler in Saddam, write Messrs. Stevens and Warner. Well, let's see. Hitler conquered all of Europe from the Arctic to the Aegean and from the Atlantic to Stalingrad. And Saddam? He invaded Kuwait, a sandbox half the size of Denmark, and got tossed out after a 100-hour ground war. His country has been overflown 40,000 times by U.S. and British planes and he has not been able to shoot a single plane down. He has no navy, a fourth-rate air force, a shrunken, demoralized army. His economy is not 1 percent of ours. No, senators, this is not the Fuhrer and the Republican Guard is not the Wehrmacht. As Marx said, history repeats itself, first as tragedy, then as farce. #149; IPatrick J. Buchanan is a former White House
[CTRL] U.S. softens Iraq draft
-Caveat Lector- From http://www.iht.com/articles/74143.html Copyright © 2002 The International Herald Tribune | www.iht.com U.S. softens Iraq draft Brian Knowlton International Herald Tribune Friday, October 18, 2002 New wording calls for greater UN role WASHINGTON Seeking to end an impasse with France over Iraq and to ease widespread opposition at the UN to its threats of war, the United States on Thursday offered a revised resolution giving more weight to arms inspectors' findings and calling for further Security Council consultations before any decision to attack Baghdad, diplomats said. The new draft moves the Bush administration nearer to the majority stance on the Security Council, which wants a UN role in any decision to attack Iraq over its biological, chemical and nuclear weapons programs and its defiance of past UN demands. It fell short, however, of the French insistence on a second resolution to authorize war if, and only if, the Security Council decided that Iraq had unacceptably impeded returning UN arms inspectors. It now all depends on Washington and Paris, said a Security Council diplomat. France was studying the new draft, but a Foreign Ministry spokesman, Francois Rivasseau, said that the two-day debate on Iraq before the Security Council, concluding Thursday, showed broad international support for the French position. Nation after nation at the United Nations has advocated an early return of weapons inspectors to Iraq and urged the council to warn Washington against military action. Several U.S. allies - the European Union, Canada, Australia and New Zealand - backed the U.S. stance that Iraq, which has flouted UN resolutions for years, should be told in clear and tough terms that it must grant inspectors unrestricted access to all sites. None of the allies, however, called for a resolution authorizing military action. The new U.S. draft foresees a return to the Security Council after UN arms inspectors report on their progress - which could take many months. Unlike in the original U.S. draft, the United States would not be given presumptive UN clearance to determine if Iraq was cooperating sufficiently. Nothing in the draft, however, would prevent the United States from deciding to attack Iraq after the Security Council began its consultations. The United States has increased pressure in public venues and in diplomatic corridors to persuade France to join in its approach. France is pondering the new U.S. approach, diplomats said. It's a matter of whether the French can swallow this or whether they keep pushing until the U.S. goes over the brink and decides to walk away, a diplomat close to the Security Council said. A U.S. spokesman denied earlier news reports that the United States had dropped its demand for a single resolution authorizing use of force. We have not and will not back away from one resolution, said the spokesman by telephone from the United Nations. We want a resolution with full authority in the first and final resolution. The United States continued to press France, one of the five permanent Security Council members, to drop its insistence on a two-resolution approach. One Bush administration official was quoted as saying that Washington was giving Paris one last shot. Another cautioned that Washington's patience was not going to last forever. France's position enjoys backing from two other permanent members, Russia and China. Britain, the fifth permanent member, supports U.S. calls for a tough line on Iraq, even while remaining open to a Security Council compromise. Ambassador Jeremy Greenstock said that intense efforts were under way to reach an accord acceptable to all. We're looking for unity in the council, he said. But President Jacques Chirac of France, speaking Wednesday, indicated no softening of the French stance. In a statement seen by some as a veto threat, Chirac said that France wanted a resolution in line with the interests of the region as we see them. If that failed, he added, France, as a member of the Security Council and a permanent member, will assume its responsibilities. And in Lebanon on Thursday, Chirac told the Parliament in Beirut: Military action, the last option, is not a foregone conclusion. The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, John Negroponte, briefed Bush and his senior advisers Wednesday that a majority of the 15-member Security Council appeared to disagree with the U.S. position. But Bush's feeling, sources told The Washington Post, was that he had made good on his pledge to consult the United Nations; it would not be his fault if agreement were not reached. If war came without a resolution, a source was quoted as saying, The French will be responsible for it. A senior State Department official played down the U.S.-$ French divide, however. The French really do want to be with us, he told The New York Times. The French are worried that if the first resolution authorizes all
[CTRL] Rebuilding Iraq: Japan Is No Model
-Caveat Lector- From: Euphorian Rebuilding Iraq: Japan Is No Model By Chalmers Johnson Chalmers Johnson is president of the Japan Policy Research Institute. His latest book is Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire (Owl Books, 2001). October 17 2002 According to press reports, the White House is developing a plan, modeled on the postwar occupation of Japan, to install an American-led military government in Iraq. Administration officials said Iraq would be governed by a senior American military officer, who would assume the role that Gen. Douglas MacArthur played in Japan after its surrender. The plan calls for war-crimes trials of Iraqi leaders and a transition to an elected civilian government after a few years of American occupation. The complete article can be viewed at: http://www.latimes.com/la-oe-chalmers17oct17,0,7814543.story Visit Latimes.com at http://www.latimes.com A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A 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://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]/A http://archive.jab.org/ctrl;listserv.aol.com/ A HREF=http://archive.jab.org/ctrl;listserv.aol.com/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] Posse Comitatus law
-Caveat Lector- From World Socialist Web Site www.wsws.org WSWS : News Analysis : North America Bush seizes on Washington-area sniper attacks to deploy military for domestic policing Deployment of Army planes breaches Posse Comitatus law By Bill Vann 18 October 2002 Back to screen version| Send this link by email | Email the author The Pentagon has deployed sophisticated military spy planes in the Washington metropolitan area as part of the manhunt for the sniper who has fatally shot nine people in a killing spree in suburban Virginia and Maryland. The decision to use the military in an ongoing criminal investigation is virtually unprecedented and constitutes a clear breach of the Posse Comitatus Act, a 125-year-old law barring the armed forces from participating in law enforcement. Pentagon and Justice Department lawyers huddled on the issue and came up with a set of protocols aimed at circumventing the law. While the US Army will operate the planes, each will carry an FBI agent aboard who will serve as an intermediary between soldiers in the plane and police forces on the ground. The RC-7 aircraft are equipped with electro-optical and infrared sensors and are able to conduct surveillance over large areas during both day and night. The planes are also able to instantly transmit high-resolution imagery to the ground. The latest victim in the sniper killings was a 47-year-old woman who worked as an intelligence analyst for the FBI, one of the agencies that requested military intervention in the case. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld signed an order deploying the aircraft on Tuesday night. Involvement in the manhunt for the sniper may not be the militarys only connection to the case. According to law-enforcement officials, the FBI has also asked the Pentagon for a list of recently discharged soldiers who went through one of the militarys sniper training schools. The military deployment in the search is only part of a massive mobilization of federal resources. Hundreds of FBI, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, and even Secret Service agents have been assigned to the case. The timing as well as the scope of this response suggests that the Bush administration is once again exploiting a tragedy and public fears to press an anti-democratic political agenda: to accustom the population to the militarization of American society, strengthen federal police powers, and implement sweeping governmental changes. The first of the shootings took place October 2, just one day after the newly created Northern Command began its operations. The command for the first time places a general in charge of military personnel whose theater of operations is the US itself. Air Force General Ralph E. Eberhart, the chief of the Northern Command, called last July for the military to be granted greater power to operate within the US as part of the Bush administrations war on terrorism. My view has been that Posse Comitatus will constantly be under review as we mature this command, the General told the New York Times in an interview. ... There are some situations where theres no other alternatives, and federal forces have to be used to secure the safety and security of our people. The generals comments echoed the views expressed by the right-wing civilian leadership of the Pentagon, which is pressing for an expanded role for the military in domestic policing. Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, for example, told a congressional panel last year that he strongly agreed with those advocating a sweeping reexamination of the Posse Comitatus doctrine. The act, passed in 1878 to end military occupation of the Reconstruction-era South, prohibits the armed forces from enforcing civil laws except in cases and under circumstances authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress. In recent years, successive administrations have whittled away at the restriction, particularly in relation to the war on drugs, allowing the use of military equipment, training and facilities to aid police agencies. Anything more than that, however, is supposed to require the presidents declaration of a national emergency. Bush administration measures have already made significant inroads into the Posse Comitatus restrictions. The deployment of armed National Guardsmen at airports nationwide was undertaken under a federal initiative, but the White House requested that state governors order the deployment to provide a legal fig leaf for the de facto violation of the Posse Comitatus law. While providing little in the way of added safety for air passengers, the deployment had the effect of accustoming the population to the daily stationing of armed troops in public places. Meanwhile, there have been persistent reports of the use of military intelligence for domestic spying, both against Arab and Muslim communities in the US, as well as at demonstrations, such as the protest that accompanied last
[CTRL] God's Court Jester
-Caveat Lector- From URL @ bottom Oct 16, 2002 Heaven Help Us: The Utterances Of God's Court Jester DANIEL RUTH Y ou really have to wonder whether Jerry Falwell gets up every morning and sticks his head in a microwave oven at full power for about 20 minutes - just to make sure he's really good and stupid for the rest of the day. Theology's answer to India's bus system was at it again recently when he was interviewed on ``60 Minutes.'' It's merely a guess, but you have to suspect the producers selected Falwell not because he represents any sort of religious expertise but because they were reasonably assured the Moral Moron would say something deliciously dense. And, of course, they were absolutely right. When it comes to running true to form, Jerry Falwell is the Vernal Equinox of vacuousness. During his televised interview, in which he deftly managed to expose himself once again as dumber than a sack of hairspray, Falwell opined that he thought Mohammed was a terrorist. ``I read enough of the history of his life by both Muslim and, and, non- Muslims, that he was a violent man, a man of war,'' Jerry Clueless said. ``Jesus set the example for love, as did Moses. And I think Mohammed set an opposite example.'' In the course of a few moments, Falwell, a theological anthrax spore, had managed to offend the adherents of a faith held dear by more than a billion people around the world. They were not amused. Loaded Question? Where did this twerp go to divinity school? Our Lady of Perpetual Perniciousness? After a global cacophony of protest during the weekend, Minister Malaprop apologized. Sort of. ``I sincerely apologize that certain statements of mine made during an interview for the September 30 edition of CBS's `60 Minutes' were harmful to the feelings of many Muslims,'' he said in a statement. But this is a chap who adheres to his own twisted interpretation of a persecution complex. He attempted to blame reporter Bob Simon for being the dark hand of fate that led to his portrayal as God's court jester. ``Unfortunately,'' whined the Vicar of Vituperation, ``I answered one controversial and loaded question at the conclusion of an hourlong interview, which I should not have answered.'' Is that so? A loaded question? Here is the question Simon asked the Elmer Gantry of Disingenuousness: ``You wrote an approving piece recently about a book called `Unveiling Islam.' And you, the authors of the book, wrote, `The Muslim who commits acts of violence in jihad does so with the approval of Mohammed.' Do you believe that?'' ``I do,'' the man of the froth responded. What was so loaded about the question? Falwell, a man abundantly experienced in dealing with interviews, either agreed with the assertions made in the book, or he didn't. It wasn't as if the reporter had asked the used- shark salesman of Scripture his opinions about the human genome project. Sorry Excuse Responsible people in this country, including President Bush, have made every effort since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks to include the Muslim faith in all manner of interdenominational services to help forge a greater unity among diverse cultures and religious beliefs. But not the likes of Falwell, who, hiding behind the charade of their calling, have continued to offer their unctuous bigotry, followed by wink- and-nod apologies. It was the Andrew Dice Clay of the New Testament who, shortly after the murders of 3,000 people, suggested it was somehow the fault of ``pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays, and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for the American Way - all of them who have tried to secularize America - I point the finger in their face and say, `You helped this happen.' '' Good grief, the Barnacle Bill of the Bible had to know after the dust-up that followed those remarks that calling Mohammed a violent terrorist on national television would not help elevate his reputation for tolerance. Over the course of his career as a holy huckster, Falwell has spent as much time apologizing as he has proselytizing. Little wonder the bully of the pulpit is such a sorry excuse for a minister. Columnist Daniel Ruth can be reached at (813) 259-7599. This story can be found at: http://www.tampatrib.com/MGAWSN4OC7D.html Go Back To The Story ~~~ AER + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forwarded as information only; I don't believe everything I read or send (but that doesn't stop me from considering it; obviously SOMEBODY thinks it's important) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 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. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
[CTRL] Falwell's follies
-Caveat Lector- From URL @ bottom Falwell's follies Bill Berkowitz - WorkingForChange 10.16.02 - What do civil libertarians, gays, feminists, pro-choice advocates, pagans and Muhammad have in common? Within the past year or so, they've all felt the verbal wrath of the Rev. Jerry Falwell. For years, the Rev. Falwell's message of hate has been mostly a domestic matter. His recent remarks on CBS' 60 Minutes calling Muhammad a terrorist, however, caused an immediate international commotion. Last year, shortly after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the Rev. Falwell told Pat Robertson's 700 Club audience that I really believe that the pagans and the abortionists and the feminists and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle... all of them who have tried to secularize America. I point the finger in their face and say, 'You helped this happen.' Besieged by critics and perceived as being pretty damned nasty, the Rev. Falwell became apologetic. Well sort of. A few days after teeing off on the laundry list of his life-long enemies, Falwell claimed that his comments were made during a theological discussion on a Christian television program [and they] were taken out of their context and reported, and that my thoughts -- reduced to sound bites -- have detracted from the spirit of this time of mourning. Like the politician who tells a racist joke and then claims he didn't know he was being recorded, Falwell claimed his words were meant only for Christian true believers, and not for the public at large. That excuse doesn't change the nature of his comments. Falwell: 'Muhammad was a terrorist' Flash forward nearly 13 months: On the October 6th edition of 60 Minutes, the Rev. Falwell told CBS' Bob Simon: I think Mohammed was a terrorist. I read enough by both Muslims and non-Muslims, [to decide] that he was a violent man, a man of war. In my opinion, Jesus set the example for love, as did Moses, and I think Mohammed set an opposite example. In short order, with critical comments against him mounting both at home and abroad, Falwell claimed that he was a victim of sound bite journalism - the real culprit was that Satanesque excuse for a journalist, Bob Simon. The Rev. Falwell is no victim. His situation is in no way comparable for example to the time Connie Chung ambushed Newt Gingrich's unsuspecting mother and got her to say some nasty stuff on network television about Hillary Clinton. The Rev. Falwell is television-savvy; he's been a guest on more television programs in a year than most all other religious figures will appear on in a lifetime. On his website, the Rev. frequently informs the faithful of his upcoming talking-head schedule. Playing the I was tricked card, the Rev. Falwell told WORLD, the weekly evangelical news magazine, that he should have known that CBS would use the comments to stir up conflict and animosity. It wasn't that his comments were hateful, the Rev. seemed to be was saying. It was the fact that CBS would use them that was the problem. According to Marvin Olasky, World's editor-in-chief, Falwell said that Simon had called him back once the uproar began, fishing for more, and that he had complained about CBS extracting from 1 1/2 hours of interview tape that divisive side remark. 'I believe you exploited me and took advantage of me as a person,' he told Mr. Simon, who quickly got off the phone, Olasky reported. Olasky rushed to Falwell's defense, and in his World column he declared Simon to be a bigot. Olasky claims that the segment on 60 Minutes was meant to focus on Christians and Israel, not Islam, but Mr. Simon in passing asked Jerry Falwell if he thought Muhammad approved of violence, and Mr. Falwell fell into the trap. CBS then promoted 60 Minutes with the 'terrorist' sound bite, in full knowledge that it was incidental to the thrust of the piece. The evident goal: Hype the program, build the audience, and never mind the lack of context. Shooting off his mouth The Rev. Falwell has made a career out of shooting off his mouth. It is only during these past few years that his remarks have become part of the greater public discourse. Claiming as he did that the television figure Tinky Winky was gay was one thing -- laughable for its utter absurdity -- but branding the head of a religion a terrorist is a much more serious matter. On October 11, Canadian Press reported that at least five people were killed in Hindu- Muslim rioting and police gunfire in western India. According to Canadian Press, The violence erupted during a general strike to protest remarks by the Rev. Falwell. In Iran to get that country's support for a tough UN resolution against Iraq, British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said he regarded Falwell's comments as much an insult to me as a Christian as they are to Muslims. Finally, on Saturday, October 12, the Rev. Falwell issued an apology. According to
[CTRL] Career Opportunities - WHITEHOUSE.ORG
-Caveat Lector- http://www.whitehouse.org/opportunities.asp A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A 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://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]/A http://archive.jab.org/ctrl;listserv.aol.com/ A HREF=http://archive.jab.org/ctrl;listserv.aol.com/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] frontline: the gulf war | PBS
-Caveat Lector- http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/gulf/ A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A 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://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]/A http://archive.jab.org/ctrl;listserv.aol.com/ A HREF=http://archive.jab.org/ctrl;listserv.aol.com/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] Cheney: Dove
-Caveat Lector- From http://slate.msn.com/?id=2072609 Hot linques @ site chatterbox Gossip, speculation, and scuttlebutt about politics. Dick Cheney, Dove More on why Bush père's defense secretary didn't want to go to Baghdad. By Timothy Noah Posted Wednesday, October 16, 2002, at 4:53 PM PT Violating a core precept of journalism, Chatterbox put the most interesting part of yesterday's item at the bottom. It was a Dick Cheney quote that Patrick Tyler included in a New York Times story published April 13, 1991, a little more than a month after the shooting stopped in the Gulf war. The quote was interesting because it examined hard questions about overthrowing Saddam Hussein that James Fallows http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2002/11/fallows.htm addresses in the November Atlantic Monthlyquestions that Cheney (then defense secretary, now vice president) no longer shows the slightest interest in as the nation prepares to go to war with Iraq once again. Violating another core precept of journalism, Chatterbox will repeat the Cheney quote in full: If you're going to go in and try to topple Saddam Hussein, you have to go to Baghdad. Once you've got Baghdad, it's not clear what you do with it. It's not clear what kind of government you would put in place of the one that's currently there now. Is it going to be a Shia regime, a Sunni regime or a Kurdish regime? Or one that tilts toward the Baathists, or one that tilts toward the Islamic fundamentalists? How much credibility is that government going to have if it's set up by the United States military when it's there? How long does the United States military have to stay to protect the people that sign on for that government, and what happens to it once we leave? Now, you might argue that Cheney was just being a loyal Cabinet member, advancing arguments of his commander in chief that he didn't particularly agree with. The trouble with this interpretation is that Cheney expressed similar sentiments five years later in a Gulf War documentary produced for PBS's Frontline. Describing the decision to end the war on Feb. 27, 1991a cease-fire took effect the next day, and for the most part the United States stuck with it Cheney said: A: [T]here was no sense, I don't believe on the part of any of us who were there that day that there was any disagreement with this approach. There might have been some different views down further in the ranksGeneral McCaffrey and the guys in the 24th fought a major engagement the day after the cease- fire obviously against a brigade of Iraqi Republican Guard. But there was no sense at that time that there was any different point of view that we ought to keep the conflict going much longer. Q: You were comfortable personally with this? A: I was. [ ] [A few weeks later, when the uprisings occurred among the Shi'a in the South and the Kurds in the North,] I was not an enthusiast about getting U.S. forces and going into Iraq. We were there in the southern part of Iraq to the extent we needed to be there to defeat his forces and to get him out of Kuwait, but the idea of going into Baghdad, for example, or trying to topple the regime wasn't anything I was enthusiastic about. I felt there was a real danger here that you would get bogged down in a long drawn-out conflict, that this was a dangerous, difficult part of the world; if you recall we were all worried about the possibility of Iraq coming apart, the Iranians restarting the conflict that they'd had in the eight-year bloody war with the Iranians and the Iraqis over eastern Iraq. We had concerns about the Kurds in the north, the Turks get very nervous every time we start to talk about an independent Kurdistan. Plus there was the notion that you were going to set yourself a new war aim that we hadn't talked to anybody about. That you hadn't gotten Congress to approve, hadn't talked to the American people about. You're going to find yourself in a situation where you've redefined your war aims and now set up a new war aim that in effect would detract from the enormous success you just had. What we set out to do was to liberate Kuwait and to destroy his offensive capability, that's what I said repeatedly in my public statements. That was the mission I was given by the President. That's what we did. Now you can say, well, you should have gone to Baghdad and gotten Saddam. I don't think so. [Italics Chatterbox's.] I think if we had done that we would have been bogged down there for a very long period of time with the real possibility we might not have succeeded. In the 1996 interview, Cheney actually managed to out-dove today's liberals who oppose going to war (by now, you should remember, Cheney was chairman of Halliburton, an oil- drilling company that did extensive business in the Islamic world) by suggesting that Saddam's ouster would have little beneficial effect: [I]f Saddam wasn't there, his successor probably wouldn't be notably friendlier
Re: [CTRL] Falwell's follies
-Caveat Lector- === Rev. Falwell told CBS' Bob Simon: I think Mohammed was a terrorist. I read enough by both Muslims and non-Muslims, [to decide] that he was a violent man, a man of war. In my opinion, Jesus set the example for love, as did Moses, and I think Mohammed set an opposite example. How about trying to deal with the substance of the above. . .? Islam was founded as a tool of Arab tribal warfare and then later served as a tool of Arab Imperialism! That kind of thing does not appear in the New Testament though the Old Testament is rank with it! As did Moses is an idiot add-in to pacify the Jewish community! Lloyd Miller, Research Director, A-albionic Research -Original Message- From: Conspiracy Theory Research List [mailto:CTRL;LISTSERV.AOL.COM] On Behalf Of Euphorian Sent: Friday, October 18, 2002 12:48 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [CTRL] Falwell's follies -Caveat Lector- From URL @ bottom Falwell's follies Bill Berkowitz - WorkingForChange 10.16.02 - What do civil libertarians, gays, feminists, pro-choice advocates, pagans and Muhammad have in common? Within the past year or so, they've all felt the verbal wrath of the Rev. Jerry Falwell. For years, the Rev. Falwell's message of hate has been mostly a domestic matter. His recent remarks on CBS' 60 Minutes calling Muhammad a terrorist, however, caused an immediate international commotion. Last year, shortly after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the Rev. Falwell told Pat Robertson's 700 Club audience that . I really believe that the pagans and the abortionists and the feminists and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle... all of them who have tried to secularize America. I point the finger in their face and say, 'You helped this happen.' Besieged by critics and perceived as being pretty damned nasty, the Rev. Falwell became apologetic. Well. sort of. A few days after teeing off on the laundry list of his life-long enemies, Falwell claimed that his comments were made during a theological discussion on a Christian television program [and they] were taken out of their context and reported, and that my thoughts -- reduced to sound bites -- have detracted from the spirit of this time of mourning. Like the politician who tells a racist joke and then claims he didn't know he was being recorded, Falwell claimed his words were meant only for Christian true believers, and not for the public at large. That excuse doesn't change the nature of his comments. Falwell: 'Muhammad was a terrorist' Flash forward nearly 13 months: On the October 6th edition of 60 Minutes, the Rev. Falwell told CBS' Bob Simon: I think Mohammed was a terrorist. I read enough by both Muslims and non-Muslims, [to decide] that he was a violent man, a man of war. In my opinion, Jesus set the example for love, as did Moses, and I think Mohammed set an opposite example. In short order, with critical comments against him mounting both at home and abroad, Falwell claimed that he was a victim of sound bite journalism - the real culprit was that Satanesque excuse for a journalist, Bob Simon. The Rev. Falwell is no victim. His situation is in no way comparable for example to the time Connie Chung ambushed Newt Gingrich's unsuspecting mother and got her to say some nasty stuff on network television about Hillary Clinton. The Rev. Falwell is television-savvy; he's been a guest on more television programs in a year than most all other religious figures will appear on in a lifetime. On his website, the Rev. frequently informs the faithful of his upcoming talking-head schedule. Playing the I was tricked card, the Rev. Falwell told WORLD, the weekly evangelical news magazine, that he should have known that CBS would use the comments to stir up conflict and animosity. It wasn't that his comments were hateful, the Rev. seemed to be was saying. It was the fact that CBS would use them that was the problem. According to Marvin Olasky, World's editor-in-chief, Falwell said that Simon had called him back once the uproar began, fishing for more, and that he had complained about CBS extracting from 1 1/2 hours of interview tape that divisive side remark. 'I believe you exploited me and took advantage of me as a person,' he told Mr. Simon, who quickly got off the phone, Olasky reported. Olasky rushed to Falwell's defense, and in his World column he declared Simon to be a bigot. Olasky claims that the segment on 60 Minutes was meant to focus on Christians and Israel, not Islam, but Mr. Simon in passing asked Jerry Falwell if he thought Muhammad approved of violence, and Mr. Falwell fell into the trap. CBS then promoted 60 Minutes with the 'terrorist' sound bite, in full knowledge that it was incidental to the thrust of the piece. The evident goal: Hype the program, build the audience, and never mind the lack of context. Shooting off his mouth The
[CTRL] Libertarian International Conference, London, 9-10 November
-Caveat Lector- LIBERTY 2002: THE EUROPEAN CONFERENCE OF THE LIBERTARIAN INTERNATIONAL AND THE LIBERTARIAN ALLIANCE A CONFERENCE ON INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM, THE FREE MARKET AND CIVIL LIBERTIES *** Saturday 9 November - Sunday 10 November, 2002 Saturday:10.00am-6.00pm Sunday: 10.00am-11.00pm The National Liberal Club Whitehall Place London SW1A 2HE England Speakers: *Professor Antony Flew - A Critique of Welfare Rights *Alan Forester - Why Libertarians Should Take Children Seriously *Professor John Burton - Economic Liberalism Revisited *Dr Eamon Butler - Third Way Interventionism in the UK and Its Lessons *Professor Terence Kealey - Science Is Not a Public Good - And Requires No Public Support *Stefan Blankertz - Nature or Nurture: A Libertarian Perspective on the Debate on Intelligence *Francois-Rene Rideau - Government is the Rule of Black Magic: On Human Sacrifice and Other Modern Superstitions *Sarah Lawrence - The Semblance of Consent: How Tyrants Use the Illusion of Freedom *Professor Norman Barry - Business Ethics and Regulation: A Libertarian View *Robin Ramsay - In Defence of Paranoia: Myths and Realities of Conspiracy Theory *Professor Tibor Machan - Are Political Principles Stable? *Richard Miniter - The Reality of the Middle East and Libertarian Policy Dilemmas *Dr. Ken Minogue - The Chameleon Servility and Its Contemporary Camouflage *Panel Discussion: LI and LA Representatives - Liberty and Strategy in International Context Chaired by Hubert Jongen, Chairman of the Libertarian International. *Panel Discussion: Mark Littlewood, Dr. Sean Gabb Dr. Chris R. Tame - The Destruction of Civil Liberties in the UK and Its Lessons Other Features: *Special Banquet: Including distinguished Guest Speakers and the presentation of the Libertarian Alliance's Liberty Awards for 2002 *The Think Tank Room: Displays and sale of publications by major British think tanks and political journals: Adam Smith Institute; Institute of Economic Affairs; CIVITAS; FOREST; Social Affairs Unit; Independent Healthcare Association; Social Market Foundation; Spiked; Demos; The Fabian Society; The European Foundation; LIBERTY; Salisbury Review; Lobster and others. About The Speakers: *Professor Norman Barry is Professor of Politics at the University of Buckingham. His many books and monographs include 'Hayek's Social and Economic Philosophy', 'An Introduction to Modern Political Theory', 'The Morality of Business Enterprise', 'Classical Liberalism in an Age of Post-Communism', 'Business Ethics', 'On Classical Liberalism and Libertarianism', 'Welfare', 'The New Right', 'The Invisible Hand in Economics and Politics: A Study in Two Conflicting Explanations of Society, End-States and Processes', and, for the LA, 'An Individualist's View of Marriage and the Family'. The University of Buckingham website is: http://www.buckingham.ac.uk *Dr. Stefan Blankwertz is one of Germany's leading libertarian thinkers and activists. The German representative of the Libertarian International, he is the author of many books, pamphlets and papers (in German and English), including 'Courts, Judges and the Law in the Free City', 'Has the State Always Been There?', 'Gestalt Therapy: A Libertarian Approach to the Social Psychology of Unhappiness' and (for the LA) 'Towards A Libertarian Theory of Fascism'. *Professor John Burton is currently Professor of Economics at the University of Westminster. He has published extensively in such journals as 'Economic Journal', 'International Journal of Social Economics', 'Scottish Journal of Political Economy', 'Journal of Industrial Affairs', 'Journal of Labour Research', 'Economic Affairs', 'Research in Labour Economics', 'British Journal of Industrial Relations', 'Manchester School', 'Three Banks Review', and 'Government Union Review'. His books and monographs include 'Wage Inflation', 'The Consequences of Mr. Keynes', 'The Job-Support Machine', 'Employment Policy, Trade Unions and Society', and 'Picking Losers: The Political Economy of Industrial Policy' and he has edited such works as 'Hayek's 'Serfdom' Revisited', 'Keynes's General Theory: Fifty Years On', and 'Industrial Policy'. He is a member of the Academic Advisory Council of the Institute of Economic Affairs, a member of the Editorial Board of a number of academic journals, Executive Co-Editor of 'Business Studies', and on the Advisory Council of the LA. *Dr Eamon Butler is Director of the Adam Smith Institute, the UK's leading free market think tank. He is the author of many books including 'Hayek: His Contribution to the Economic and Political Thought of Our Time', 'Milton Friedman: A Guide to His Thought', 'Ludwig Von Mises: Fountainhead of the Modern Microeconomics Revolution' and 'Forty Centuries of Wage and Price Controls'. He has also edited and contributed to countless ASI reports on many policy issues, appears on TV regularly, and contributes frequently to the press. The ASI website is:
[CTRL] THE CORPORATION AMERICA
-Caveat Lector- http://prorev.com/corpsandus.htm THE CORPORATION AMERICA Rewriting history to justify greed Sam Smith THIS ORIGINALLY APPEARED IN 'SHADOWS OF HOPE,' PUBLISHED BY INDIANA UNIVERITY PRESS, 1994 Encomiums to the wonders of market forces fill speeches and media reports. One National Public Radio reporter even went so far as to describe a form of government called market democracy, apparently a blend of the Bill of Rights and the Wall Street Journal editorial page. In fact, most free workers in this country were self-employed well into the 19th century. They were thus economic as well as political citizens. Further, until the last decades of the 19th century, Americans believed in a degree of fair distribution of wealth that would shock many today. James L. Huston writes in the American Historical Review: Americans believed that if property were concentrated in the hands of a few in a republic, those few would use their wealth to control other citizens, seize political power, and warp the republic into an oligarchy. Thus to avoid descent into despotism or oligarchy, republics had to possess an equitable distribution of wealth. Such a distribution, in theory at least, came from enjoying the "fruits of one's labor" but no more. Businesses that sprung up didn't flourish on competition because there generally wasn't any and, besides, cooperation worked better. You didn't need two banks or two drug stores in the average town. Prices and business ethics were not regulated by the marketplace but by a complicated cultural code and the fact that the banker went to church with his depositors. Although the practice was centuries old, the term capitalism -- and thus the religion -- didn't even exist until the middle of the 19th century. Americans were intensely commercial, but this spirit was propelled not by Reaganesque fantasies about competition but by the freedom that engaging in business provided from the hierarchical social and economic system of the monarchy. Business, including the exchange as well as the making of goods, was seen as a natural state allowing a community and individuals to get ahead and to prosper without the blessing of nobility. In the beginning, if you wanted to form a corporation you needed a state charter and had to prove it was in the public interest, convenience and necessity. During the entire colonial period only about a half-dozen business corporations were chartered; between the end of the Revolution and 1795 this rose to about a 150. Jefferson to the end opposed liberal grants of corporate charters and argued that states should be allowed to intervene in corporate matters or take back a charter if necessary. With the pressure for more commerce and indications that corporate grants were becoming a form of patronage, states began passing free incorporation laws and before long Massachusetts had thirty times as many corporations as there were in all of Europe. How states once controlled corporations The purposes for which every such corporation shall be established shall be distinctly and definitely specified in the articles of association, and it shall not be lawful for said corporation to appropriate its funds to any other purpose. -- State of Wisconsin, 1864 The charter or acts of association of every corporation hereafter created may be amendable or repealed at the will of the general assembly. -- State of Rhode Island, 1857 [Legislators shall] alter, revoke or annul any charter of a corporate hereafter conferred . . . whenever in their opinion it may be injurious to citizens of the community. -- State of Pennsylvania, constitutional amendment, 1857. Still it wasn't until after the Civil War that economic conditions turned sharply in favor of the large corporation. These corporations, says Huston: . . . killed the republican theory of the distribution of wealth and probably ended whatever was left of the political theory of republicanism as well. . . .[The] corporation brought about a new form of dependency. Instead of industry, frugality, and initiatives producing fruits, underlings in the corporate hierarchy had to be aware of style, manners, office politics, and choice of patrons -- very reminiscent of the Old Whig corruption in England at the time of the revolution -- what is today called "corporate culture." Concludes Huston: The rise of Big Business generated the most important transformation of American life that North America has ever experienced. By the end of the last century the Supreme Court had declared corporations to be persons under the 14th Amendment, entitled to the same protections as human beings. As Morton Mintz
[CTRL] Please Do Not Lick Meat Mountain
-Caveat Lector- from Mark Morford's Morning Fix email newsletter http://sfgate.com/columnists/morford/archive/ : **Please Do Not Lick Meat Mountain** Poultry processor Pilgrim's Pride is recalling 27.4 million pounds of cooked sandwich meat after warnings of possible contamination from the listeria bacteria -- the largest meat recall in U.S. history, following the now seemingly paltry recall of a mere 3 million pounds of meat by Empak Foods of Milwaukee just last week due to E.coli, which makes for over 30 million pounds of recalled meat in just a few days, and keeping in mind such recalls happen all the time but that meat packers aren't legally required to report such recalls to the media, and only do so when the meat is particularly nasty or they could get their toxic parasitic asses sued, and let's not even get started on what's actually in the meat or how a liquefied chemically injected reconstituted chicken nugget thing gets made in the first place, because it's just too early in the week, and you probably haven't even had lunch yet, though you might want to avoid that processed turkey sandwich for a while, just sayin'. http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2002/10/14/financial0905EDT0013.DTL A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A 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://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]/A http://archive.jab.org/ctrl;listserv.aol.com/ A HREF=http://archive.jab.org/ctrl;listserv.aol.com/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] Should America Go to War? (fwd)
-Caveat Lector- I pledge Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the REPUBLIC for which it stands, one Nation under God,indivisible,with liberty and justice for all. visit my web site at http://www.voicenet.com/~wbacon My ICQ# is 79071904 for a precise list of the powers of the Federal Government linkto: http://www.voicenet.com/~wbacon/Enumerated.html -- Forwarded message -- Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 06:34:21 -0400 From: John P [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: John Birch Discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Should America Go to War? http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/2002/10-21-2002/vo18no21_war.htm Should America Go to War? by William Norman Grigg When our freedoms and sovereignty are threatened, we have to fight. But resuming the war on Iraq would actually empower a far greater threat - the United Nations. When the Twin Towers collapsed on 9-11, the American public was told that everything changed, and an instant cliché was born. A year later, the Bush administration is striving to convince the public that its impending attack on Iraq is a vital part of the war on terrorism that began on Black Tuesday. But this is a deception. If the Black Tuesday hijackers had been caught, if the Twin Towers still stood proudly, if the Pentagon remained unblemished, if the 3,000 innocent people slain that morning were still among the living, the Bush administration and the Power Elite behind it would still be pursuing, to the extent possible, the policies that have brought us to the brink of an unjustified, aggressive war on Iraq. The impending war on Saddam Hussein's Iraqi regime will have nothing to do with the 9-11 terrorist atrocity, or with protecting any rationally defined American national interest. These considerations were conspicuously absent from President Bush's September 12th address to the UN General Assembly. Indeed, apart from cursory references to the Black Tuesday attack, there was nothing in President Bush's speech that hadn't been said by Bill Clinton, or by Republican congressional leaders, during the last installment of the protracted Iraq crisis back in 1998. Submitting to UN Power The conduct of the Iraqi regime is a threat to the authority of the United Nations, and a threat to peace, stated Mr. Bush in his speech to the General Assembly. Iraq has answered a decade of U.N. demands with a decade of defiance. All the world now faces a test, and the United Nations a difficult and defining moment. Are Security Council resolutions to be honored and enforced, or cast aside without consequence? Will the United Nations serve the purpose of its founding, or will it be irrelevant? The president reprised that theme in his September 14th national radio address. And he recited the same mantra in remarks for reporters at a Camp David press conference that same day: The U.N. will either be able to function as a peacekeeping body as we head into the 21st century, or it will be irrelevant. And that's what we're about to find out This is the chance for the United Nations to show some backbone and resolve as we confront the true challenges of the 21st century. In this, as in so many other issues, Mr. Bush is following the same script as his predecessor. In a January 29, 1998 address to National Defense University, Bill Clinton urged Americans to prepare for military action against Iraq as part of an effort to write the international rules of the road for the 21st Century, protecting those who've joined the family of nations and isolating those who do not. Urging Americans to be strong and tough and mature enough to recognize that even the best-prepared, best-equipped force will suffer losses in action, Clinton predicted that a military strike would soon be launched against Iraq to force Saddam to comply with the . will of the United Nations and to advance the world body's arms control and nonproliferation agenda. During a February 6, 1998 joint press conference with British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Clinton pointedly observed that the anticipated military strike on Iraq was intended to force the regime to fulfill all of the United Nations Security Council resolutions. Asked if the campaign would also seek Saddam's removal from power, Clinton replied: That is not what the United Nations has authorized us to do. The only material difference between the Iraq policies of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush is this: Clinton adhered precisely to UN Security Council guidelines; Mr. Bush favors enforcement of UN Security Council dictates with the added objective of regime change. In fact, the president's enthusiasm to carry out the UN's decrees apparently exceeds that of the UN itself. But once again, Mr. Bush seems to be working from an updated version of an old script. In a February 4, 1998 press conference, then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) insisted that Saddam will either agree to unlimited UN
Re: [CTRL] Falwell's follies
-Caveat Lector- Christianity wasn't used as a tool in European imperialism? on 10/18/02 6:44 AM, Lloyd Miller at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How about trying to deal with the substance of the above. . .? Islam was founded as a tool of Arab tribal warfare and then later served as a tool of Arab Imperialism! That kind of thing does not appear in the New Testament though the Old Testament is rank with it! As did Moses is an idiot add-in to pacify the Jewish community! It is not the function of our government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the government from falling into error. Justice Robert H. Jackson NEURONAUTIC INSTITUTE on-line: http://home.earthlink.net/~thew A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A 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://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]/A http://archive.jab.org/ctrl;listserv.aol.com/ A HREF=http://archive.jab.org/ctrl;listserv.aol.com/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] Sharon Doctrine for Iraq?
-Caveat Lector- I'm no lover of Sharon - but he is really a red herring in this article. on 10/18/02 3:20 AM, Euphorian at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Caveat Lector- From http://www.iht.com/articles/73960.html Copyright © 2002 The International Herald Tribune | www.iht.com American policymakers awash in fantasy William Pfaff IHT Thursday, October 17, 2002 Re-educate the Iraqis? PARIS Even before the newspaper reports of a plan for lasting military occupation of Iraq, on the model of the post-World War II occupation of Japan, the debate over war with Iraq was awash with unchecked fantasies about the future. The debate has mostly consisted of unproved assertions about Iraq's weapons or lack of them; about the threat that it does, or does not, pose to its neighborhood or Israel or the United States; and about its connection, or lack of connection, with international terrorism. It is a highly emotional argument untroubled by much fact. The outcome will apparently be decided by whoever last has the president's ear. The Senate, constitutional custodian of the power to go to war, has abdicated to George W. Bush, conceding to him greater discretion than to any president in history. This is not the conduct of a serious government or a serious nation. War is a grave matter even for a country that fancies itself invincible. One does not attack another society, inflict destruction upon it, kill its soldiers and people and send one's own soldiers to death on the basis of speculation, hypothesis and partisan theories about the future. The United States has never before gone to war without a clear and factually uncontroversial casus belli. In the Gulf War it was Iraq's aggression against Kuwait. In Vietnam it was Communist insurrection against a recognized government. The merits of America's intervention in these wars were certainly controversial, but the facts of aggression, and the facts of insurrection, were there. Today there is as yet no incontrovertible fact that justifies war against Iraq. That is why there is such a controversy. Sending the United Nations inspectors back might produce some facts to replace speculation. Bush supporters now have offered a new theory about American-led peaceful revolution in the region, its democratization and peaceful economic transformation, with reform of Islamic religious thought so as to reconcile Islam with modern Western culture. The newly disclosed plan for military occupation of a defeated Iraq makes up part of this theory. The occupation will reform and re-educate Iraq, supposedly in the way imperial Japan and Nazi Germany were remade after 1945. Only people who know little about Japan and Germany in the 1940s could make such an assumption. Historical ignorance, however deplorable, is not considered an impediment to policy-making in today's Washington. But the people putting these ideas forward cannot pretend to be ignorant of political Washington, the nature and preoccupations of the U.S. Congress today and the temper of American public opinion. The numbers offered in Washington concerning such a military occupation are between 75,000 and 100,000 troops. This is roughly one-fifth of the total personnel of the existing regular army of the United States. And The cost of an occupation is estimated at some $16 billion per year. That is more than 4 percent of the total U.S. military budget for fiscal 2003, including the post-Sept. 11 Bush administration's military budget increase. There is no possibility whatever that the American government and public would make such a commitment of men and money to Iraq. Would other countries pay? Not if there had been no United Nations mandate for the war. Europe after 1945 simply needed to have its economy rebuilt. That is what Marshall Plan money accomplished. The Marshall Plan did not reform or transform European society, nor was it expected to do so. Japan, like Europe, had an advanced industry in 1941. It would not otherwise have been able to put up a ferocious three-and-a-half-year defense against American offensives in the Central and Southwestern Pacific and against the British/Indian advance in South Asia. Japan in 1945 was also an intensely corporate, authoritarian and hierarchical society. By leaving the emperor in place, and acting with his consent and authority, the MacArthur occupation was able to conduct a peaceful reform of the Japanese government, economy and educational system. The Japanese authorities policed the country, not the American occupation. There was no resistance. Would there be resistance to American occupation of Iraq? It is another agreeable fantasy to think that American soldiers would be cheered as they arrived, and be encouraged by the Iraqis to take over their country. What would George W. Bush do, though, if the Iraqi army put up a serious fight, and if the
[CTRL] North Korea 'has two nuclear bombs'
-Caveat Lector- http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/10/18/ wkor18.xmlsSheet=/portal/2002/10/18/ixport.htmlsecureRefresh= true_requestid=148343 Friday 18 October 2002 telegraph.co.uk North Korea 'has two nuclear bombs' By David Rennie in Washington (Filed: 18/10/2002) North Korea possesses two plutonium-based nuclear bombs, a senior Bush administration official said yesterday. It was the first official confirmation that a member of President Bush's Axis of Evil has obtained nuclear weapons. It is our assessment that North Korea has reprocessed before 1994 sufficient plutonium for one or two nuclear weapons, the official said, asking to remain anonymous. When pressed he said North Korea had two bombs. A satellite image of the Yongbyon nuclear facility that may produce weapons-grade uranium A senior US official suggested that North Korea, which is ruled by Kim Jong-il, an unpredictable, despotic leader, may have had foreign help in creating its uranium enrichment programme. The official told reporters in Washington that, according to US studies of other attempts to produce enriched uranium: This has never been done indigenously. . . these programmes are dependent on support from the outside. Donald Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary, said that although no western intelligence official had physically laid a hand on a North Korean nuclear warhead: I believe they have a small number of nuclear weapons. Mr Rumsfeld's remarks were prompted by North Korea's own admission that - separately from any plutonium stockpiles - it has been running a secret programme to produce enriched weapons- grade uranium. North Korea's admission, which came during a tense meeting with a senior US envoy, has angered and dismayed Western allies. Britain, which only established diplomatic relations with North Korea two years ago, abruptly postponed the despatch of the first full British ambassador to Pyongyang, David Slinn, who had been due to go this weekend. A Foreign Office spokesman said: In the light of this news, we are reflecting further on the best time for David Slinn to take up his appointment. -- Outgoing mail is certified virus free Scanned by Norton AntiVirus I'd like to teach the world we're nice, And live in harmony, with terrorists and communists--one happy family. I'd like to give the world our nukes and start a peaceful song. To have such might is just not right-- America is always wrong. I'd like to give the world our nukes and furnish all their plans. To Red Chinese and Iraqis and crazies in Iran. I'd like to see the world as one, all havin' lots of fun, nukes everywhere, but hey who cares? at least they're not handguns! ~~Paul Shanklin, singing as Bill Clinton A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A 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://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]/A http://archive.jab.org/ctrl;listserv.aol.com/ A HREF=http://archive.jab.org/ctrl;listserv.aol.com/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] Unsubscribe
-Caveat Lector- How do you get off this list? A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/"www.ctrl.org/A 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://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
Re: [CTRL] Unsubscribe
Title: Re: [CTRL] Unsubscribe -Caveat Lector- Bwahh haha You cant get OFF this list Your name has been inscribed on the the great stone of treasonous freethinkers. Maybe you could get a mason to chip it off If you knew the code phrase and right handshake, anyway on 10/18/02 1:20 PM, Aol user at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Caveat Lector- How do you get off this list? A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/www.ctrl.org/A" 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://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.htmlArchives" 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 - -- --- - You should view the world as a conspiracy run by a very closely-knit group of nearly omnipotent people, and you should think of those people as yourself and your friends. --Robert Anton Wilson NEURONAUTIC INSTITUTE on-line: http://home.earthlink.net/~thew A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/"www.ctrl.org/A 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://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
Re: [CTRL] Unsubscribe
-Caveat Lector- ROFLMAO! thew wrote: -Caveat Lector- Bwahh haha You cant get OFF this list Your name has been inscribed on the the great stone of treasonous freethinkers. Maybe you could get a mason to chip it off If you knew the code phrase and right handshake, anyway on 10/18/02 1:20 PM, Aol user at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Caveat Lector- How do you get off this list? A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org/A> 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://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 - -- --- - "You should view the world as a conspiracy run by a very closely-knit group of nearly omnipotent people, and you should think of those people as yourself and your friends." --Robert Anton Wilson NEURONAUTIC INSTITUTE on-line: http://home.earthlink.net/~thew A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org/A> 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://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 A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/"www.ctrl.org/A 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://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
Re: [CTRL] Sharon Doctrine for Iraq?
-Caveat Lector- 10/18/02 8:58:33 AM, thew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Caveat Lector- I'm no lover of Sharon - but he is really a red herring in this article. Yeah ... that's what became an interesting surpriae about the article ... how the conclusion was not really supported by the rest of the text. I originally found it interesting because of the Iraq - Japan disconnect. AER A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A 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://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]/A http://archive.jab.org/ctrl;listserv.aol.com/ A HREF=http://archive.jab.org/ctrl;listserv.aol.com/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] Falwell's follies
-Caveat Lector- 10/18/02 8:55:09 AM, thew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Caveat Lector- Christianity wasn't used as a tool in European imperialism? Or American? AER A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A 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://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]/A http://archive.jab.org/ctrl;listserv.aol.com/ A HREF=http://archive.jab.org/ctrl;listserv.aol.com/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] Falwell's follies
-Caveat Lector- That too... on 10/18/02 3:38 PM, Euphorian at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Caveat Lector- 10/18/02 8:55:09 AM, thew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Caveat Lector- Christianity wasn't used as a tool in European imperialism? Or American? AER 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://archive.jab.org/ctrl;listserv.aol.com/ A HREF=http://archive.jab.org/ctrl;listserv.aol.com/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 -- Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened. Sir Winston Churchill NEURONAUTIC INSTITUTE on-line: http://home.earthlink.net/~thew A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A 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://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]/A http://archive.jab.org/ctrl;listserv.aol.com/ A HREF=http://archive.jab.org/ctrl;listserv.aol.com/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] Judge Orders Release
-Caveat Lector- From http://www.thedailyenron.com/documents/20021018090236-48993.asp Judge Orders Release of Documents Hidden at Presidential Sites Mind Your Business, Part 10 They continue to hide relevant documents. They snub their noses at legal mandates to comply. They repeatedly obstruct attempts to verify their claims. Who? Iraq? No - the Bush administration. Yesterday US District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan ran out of patience. Judge Sullivan once again ordered the Bush White House to turn over documents that chronicle Vice President Dick Cheney's energy task force meetings last year. The administration has been sued several times over the documents - including one case brought by its own General Accounting Office. Federal judges in those other cases have ordered the Energy Department to turn over thousands of pages of many key documents relating to Cheney's meetings with energy firms - including Enron - that were spirited off to the White House for safekeeping. Yesterday's hearing was especially contentious and was marked by several sharp exchanges between Sullivan and Shannen W. Coffin, the Justice Department attorney handling the case for the White House. Coffin has refused to produce the documents being sought by plaintiffs, the Sierra Club and Judicial Watch, stating that having to do so would impose upon the executive unconstitutional burdens. But, Coffin did not specify precisely what would be unconstitutional, and he specifically did not declare the documents were privileged. A clearly infuriated Judge Sullivan told Coffin he could not have it both ways. You have to produce the non-privileged documents and assert the [executive] privilege for those that are, he told Coffin. You refuse to assert the privilege and won't respond to court orders. Coffin countered by contending that the document request would place an undue interference on executive branch operations, and that the consideration of undue interference requires special treatment by this court in this context. Sullivan wasn't buying it. He set a November 5 deadline for the White House to either cough up the documents or return to the court with a formal declaration of executive privilege. That's when things got really interesting. As the judge was preparing to adjourn the hearing, Coffin asked for an extension. The reason, he said, was that they could not determine what documents might or might not be privileged since they had not inspected them yet. Judge Sullivan hit the roof. That is a startling revelation! the judge said twice. How can you be asserting this is privileged information if you haven't looked at it? We haven't completed the review, Coffin said. We've done enough to know our arguments are correct, he said. How could you misspeak on something as significant as that? Sullivan shouted back. Now Judge Sullivan knows what it's like to be a weapons inspector in Iraq. First Energy, Now Food? When a politician takes a lot of money from a special interest group it can sometimes impair their reflexes. They move slowly, when they should move fast. That's exactly what happened this week when thousands of consumers were exposed to potentially deadly food poisoning. On October 2, federal food inspectors were led to a New Jersey processing plant after six people died and dozens were sickened after eating cold meats packed by the plant. Tests turned up deadly listeria bacteria in meats processed at the plant - and food shipped nationwide. Pilgrim's Pride announced a voluntary recall of 27 million pounds of turkey and chicken products after tests found listeria in drains at their plant. But wait, where was the USDA? Moving slow. Real slow. You see, Pilgrim's Pride, as part of the poultry and food processing industry, have been large GOP contributors (82% of donations to the GOP, 18% to Dems) They like the regulation-lite policies of Republicans. Candidate George W. Bush was provided with rides on Pilgrim's corporate jets at least five times during his campaign for president. Apparently not wanting to upset their friends in the meat processing business, the Bush administration didn't make a big deal out of this little listeria outbreak. Since Pilgrim's Pride had agreed to a voluntary recall, why make a federal case out it? Right? Well, how about school kids? Might that be a good reason to make a big deal out of it? Apparently not good enough for the Bush administration. It seems in trying hard to be discreet about all this unpleasantness, the USDA failed to warn schools that it had purchased and shipped to them nearly 2 million pounds of the ready-to-eat lunchmeats in question under the federal lunch program. That was not done until Sunday, October 13, eleven days after the outbreak was confirmed. Isn't it amazing that they didn't look for that (in schools) before now? said Donna Rosenbaum, spokeswoman for the advocacy group, Safe Tables Our Priority (S.T.O.P.). I find it unconscionable that they
[CTRL] Sniper Team
-Caveat Lector- From http://www.rense.com/general30/sdnip.htm Rense.com DC Killings Done By A Government Sniper Team CounterPunch List From Ken McCarthy at Brasscheck October 14, 2002 The probable make up of the Washington sniper team. First of all, we are most likely looking at a TEAM of people. I've glanced at the moronic news coverage which seems designed solely to baffle and terrorize the public. Some of the things that were obvious immediately to anyone with a lick of sense and knowledge, but have somehow not been mentioned in the press: 1. Snipers work in teams (that's finally dawning on them) 2. Leaving death cards is an old Vietnam trick (intended to add to the terror of the situation) 3. In spite of their seemingly unsophisticated weapons, these guys are military-level practitioners This is NOT simply a lone marksman and is quite possibly is more than just two people. Why? Being a sniper requires: 1) getting into position undetected, 2) maintaining cover while waiting for the shot, 3) taking the shot, and 4) getting away undetected. You don't learn that at a rifle range and even law enforcement trained snipers (of which there are many) don't learn and practice the last, vital, trick and are not well trained in skills #1 and #2. A standard sniper team includes a shooter and a spotter. The latter helps the shooter find the target and assists in the getaway. He's a second mind and pair of eyes in a very stressful and challenging situation. Why do I think this is a team of more than two? Common sense. One person to find the shot. One person to take it - and at least one person to be sitting behind the wheel ready to drive away at a second's notice. Neither the spotter nor the shooter are in a mental state to be able to do that last thing as effectively as these guys are doing. Can you imagine them running to the car, fumbling with keys (can't leave them in the ignition, can you?) etc? There may be another team member - or three - to monitor police radio, plan and navigate escape routes (which probably change depending on conditions), and provide lookouts and diversions. If the team is as big as I think it might be, it will have to have a leader, someone to be in charge of overall management and security for the group. They will also need some mundane things: food, places to stay - and they need to be controlled. Speaking of providing diversions... the white panel truck. This team could also include additional vehicles, including a white panel truck, which would be noisily and conspicuously present at every shooting as a red herring. So who is doing this? A government. You need a lot of resources and a good sized pool of highly trained and well disciplined people to pull this off. What government? Either our own or someone else's. There sure is a lot of motivation floating around right now, particularly after the Bush administration's announced 'one bullet' diplomacy initiative in Iraq. Domestic motivations: 1. Casts further negative light on private ownership of guns, essential for moving the coup to the next level 2. Maintains the atmosphere of tension and terror Bush Co. need to continue the ongoing coup at a relatively low cost 3. Blocks the headline space so that there is room for no news of substance to be reported 4. Conducts an experiment in social control The fact that this operation is taking place in the United States and so near to the largest concentration of supposedly sophisticated law enforcement and intelligence practitioners in the country - and that this team has not been even close to getting caught - leads me to favor the hypothesis that this is a domestic operation, or a foreign operation that is being permitted to take place to serve the interests of the ongoing coup. I sure wish this wasn't the case. It would be more comforting to think this is another lone 'gun nut,' but it doesn't add up. Even if such a person is 'apprehended,' I will have to doubt the veracity of the report. Logistics, it all boils down to logistics, and this looks like big league stuff. Comment From Charles Tait [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10-18-2 Dear Jeff, My thanks to Ken Mccarthy at CounterPunch/Brasscheck, and to you for posting his analysis. I'd like to add my two cents. I understand that indeed there is a 'coup' going on, and the preparations started sometime ago. The object is to turn the United States into a Banana Republic. It's happening on two levels - economically, and now politically. At this critical point in time, it only makes a kind of twisted sense to realize that our next national election may well be transformed by the kind of violence which is common in Banana Republics at election time. The most flagrant example of this kind of 'campaign' was seen recently when Mugabe was re-elected as President of Zimbabwe. In fact, he's been using these same methods since 1980, while the rest of the world looks the other way. But
[CTRL] A washingtonpost.com article from: alamaine@uffdaonline.net
-Caveat Lector- You have been sent this message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] as a courtesy of the Washington Post - http://www.washingtonpost.com To view the entire article, go to http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A45779-2002Oct18.html Wis. Senate Leader Faces Charges By Jenny PriceMADISON, Wis. #150;#150; The state Assembly's two most power Republican leaders were charged with felony misconduct in office Friday, one day after the Senate majority leader was charged with 20 felony counts.PProsecutors investigating illegal campaigning in the state capitol also filed charges against another Republican Assembly member and a former employee Friday.PThe three felony counts against Assembly Speaker Scott Jensen stem from his supervision of the Assembly Republican Caucus, hiring of the former employee, Sherry Schultz, to work as a full-time fund-raiser on state time, and using his legislative staff to work on his political campaigns.PHe also is charged with a misdemeanor of using his public position to obtain financial gain for the Republican Assembly Campaign Committee, the same charge Assistant Majority Leader Bonnie Ladwig faces.PSingle charges against Assembly Majority Leader Steve Foti and Schultz stem from her employment as well.PJensen issued a statement Friday morning denying the charges.PI intend to prove my innocence and fight for our honor, he said.PFriday's charges bring the total of lawmakers charged in the investigation to five.PSenate Majority Leader Chuck Chvala, a Democrat, was charged with 20 felony counts Thursday, and fellow Democratic Sen. Brian Burke was charged with 18 felonies over the summer.PChvala, accused of demanding campaign contributions for himself and other Democrats and threatening to block legislation if lobbyists failed to deliver, said Thursday he would resign his position once Democrats select a majority leader.PHe denounced the charges as an attempt to influence the Nov. 5 elections by politically motivated special interest lobbyists and a district attorney bent on political revenge PI will fight these allegations because they are not true, Chvala said.PHe could face up to 90 years in prison and $200,000 in fines if convicted on the charges, which include extortion, misconduct in public office, making unlawfu with the Elections Board.PThe investigations by Milwaukee County District Attorney E. Michael McCann and Dane County District Attorney Brian Blanchard began last year after the Wisconsin State Journal reported that legislative caucus employees were coordinating campaign activities from their state offices using state resources, in violation of the law.PThe caucuses #150; one for each party in each chamber #150; were created in the 1960s to do research for lawmakers. The partisan bodies were eliminated last year in a deal legislative leaders reached that was meant to end a state investigation into the allegations.PChvala, 47, was elected to the Senate in 1984 and has been Democratic leader since 1995. He ran for governor in 1994, losing to then-Gov. Tommy Thompson, who is now secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.PBurke was charged over the summer with using his Capitol office to collect campaign contributions in his now-defunct bid for attorney general. A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A 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://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]/A http://archive.jab.org/ctrl;listserv.aol.com/ A HREF=http://archive.jab.org/ctrl;listserv.aol.com/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] National Debt Increases Chart
-Caveat Lector- http://www.lafn.org/politics/gvdc/Natl_Debt_Chart.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. 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://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]/A http://archive.jab.org/ctrl;listserv.aol.com/ A HREF=http://archive.jab.org/ctrl;listserv.aol.com/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] NYTimes.com Article: Increase in Autism Baffles Scientists
-Caveat Lector- Wouldn't it be nice to know which "areas" or cities had the highest incidents and how that correlated with fluoridation of the water supply? Prudy A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/"www.ctrl.org/A 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://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] Ruppert: The Unseen Conflict
-Caveat Lector- http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/101802_the_unseen.html The Unseen Conflict War Plans, Backroom Deals, Leverage and Strategy -- Securing What's Left of the Planet's Oil Is and Has Always Been the Bottom Line by Michael C. Ruppert © COPYRIGHT 2002, Michael C. Ruppert and FTW Publications, www.copvcia.com all rights reserved. May be reprinted or distributed for non-profit purposes only.] Oct. 18, 2002, 17:00 PDT (FTW) -- What started out as a blitzkrieg, the Bush agenda for the invasion of Iraq is now producing a world picture that can only be described with one word -- confusing. It is becoming apparent that outraged world opinion, guided by shrewd public relations efforts of foreign governments (including Iraq), has thrown a curve ball to the Bush military plan for a pre-election invasion and occupation . But one curve ball is not a strikeout. The continuing military build up, more frequent air strikes, and the risky covert deployment of combat troops in supposedly neutral regions shows the degree of Washington's commitment to war. These troops are going to be used. Russia, France and China are only stalling for time, hoping to cut the best backroom deals possible. They're perhaps also hoping that the American Empire will make a fatal mistake or a delay will break Bush's political, popular, and economic support. Wall Street's 500-plus point rally on the two days of shameless congressional votes authorizing the use of force last week clearly signaled what world leaders have known for some time, and what the American public is seriously beginning to grasp -- the whole thing is about Iraqi oil. The Associated Press ran a story yesterday indicating that the U.S. had been overwhelmed by global opposition to the invasion of a country second only to Saudi Arabia for its known oil reserves. Iraq is capable of quick production increases even if Saddam tries to destroy his oil fields, as former CIA director James Woolsey recently acknowledged. The story's lead sentence read, "Facing strong opposition from dozens of nations, the United States has backed down from its demand that a new U.N. resolution must authorize military force if Baghdad fails to cooperate with weapons inspectors, diplomats told The Associated Press on Thursday." However, a Reuters story released hours later clearly indicated that the U.S. was playing hardball behind the scenes. "Iraq's main opposition group says a post-Saddam government would review existing oilfield development deals with French and Russian companies and could favour U.S. firms instead. "Sharif Ali Bin Al Hussein, spokesman for the main Iraqi opposition group the Iraqi National Congress (INC), told Reuters in an interview that his group would open the oil sector to all companies, including the U.S. majors. "'We would have to review all contracts which have been signed by this regime to make sure it is in the interest of the Iraqi people and not just for Saddam Hussein,' Hussein said." Nobody is asking who controls the INC. It's a given. The stakes are incredibly high for Russia. Major press organizations are now acknowledging what FTW has been saying for months. The Bush objective is to drive the price of oil down and simultaneously drive a stake through OPEC, forestalling a further and perhaps catastrophic crash in the U.S. economy. News analyses from Pravda to Fox News have foreseen that a successful U.S. invasion will result in crude oil prices of between $12 and $16 per barrel. Oil currently consts $30 per barrel. That would destroy Russia's economic recovery as it sells hand over fist its own diminishing reserves -- oil that is more expensive to produce and of a lesser quality than Mideast crude, while prices are at $30. Iraq owes Russia $7 billion in debt from the Soviet era. And on Aug. 19, Russia and Iraq signed a $40 billion infrastructure development deal, which, as reported in the Tehran Times, saw a team of Russian engineers on their way to what may soon be targets of U.S. bombing raids. Both Russia and France have development interests in major Iraqi oil fields. The Reuters story reported, "Although [France's] TotalFinaElf has no contract, it has been earmarked by Saddam's government to develop the Majnoon and Bin Umar fields with reserves totaling 26 billion barrels. [Russia's] Lukoil has signed a contract for the 15 billion-barrel West Qurna field." The back room deals and implied threats are getting hot and heavy. On Sept. 5, the Asia Times reported that Russia was considering an expensive trans-Siberian pipeline to service China. This would compete with post-9-11 pipeline deals that have been negotiated to send Caspian and Central Asian oil through Afghanistan for the Chinese market under U.S. control. As FTW noted last month, the World Bank has opened offices in Kabul to facilitate the financing of the U.S.-backed projects. Russia's move may not be much of a threat because Russian oil is inferior to Caspian
[CTRL] NYTimes.com Article: Increase in Autism Baffles Scientists
-Caveat Lector- This article from NYTimes.com has been sent to you by [EMAIL PROTECTED] Increase in Autism Baffles Scientists October 18, 2002 By SANDRA BLAKESLEE Trying to account for a drastic rise in childhood autism in recent years, a California study has found that it cannot be explained away by statistical anomalies or by a growing public awareness that might have led more parents to report the disorder. But the study's authors, who reported their findings yesterday to the California Legislature, said they were at a loss to explain the reasons for what they called an epidemic of autism, the mysterious brain disorder that affects a person's ability to form relationships and to behave normally in everyday life. Autism is on the rise in the state, and we still do not know why, said the lead author, Dr. Robert S. Byrd, an epidemiologist and pediatrician at the University of California at Davis. The results are, without a doubt, sobering. As diagnoses of autism have increased throughout the nation, experts and parents have cast about for possible explanations, including genetics, birth injuries and childhood immunizations. The California study found that none of these factors could explain an increase of the magnitude reported there - more than triple from 1987 to 1998. Dr. Catherine Lord, a professor of psychology and psychiatry at the University of Michigan who is a leading authority on autism, said it was unclear whether the California findings applied to other states. The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is working in 13 states to look at the apparent increase in autism cases, said Dr. Frank DeStefano, an epidemiologist at the agency. So far, there is no reliable count of autism cases nationwide, since criteria and reporting practices vary from state to state. The California study was prompted by a 1999 report from the state's Department of Developmental Services, which reported that the number of children with full spectrum, or profound, autism had increased by 273 percent, to 10,360 in 1998 from 2,778 in 1987. The study did not deal with milder forms of the disorder, like Asperger syndrome. The numbers were surprising, Dr. Byrd said. The traditional estimate was that 4 or 5 children out of 10,000 might develop autism. Instead, it appeared that 10 children in every 10,000 were seriously autistic, meaning they suffered from a brain disorder that left them unable to speak or compulsively performing repetitive motions like flapping their arms or rocking. After the period studied, the number of autistic children continued to rise, to 18,460 cases as of July 2002, according to the California Department of Developmental Services. In response to the study, the legislature directed the MIND Institute, an autism research center at the University of California at Davis, to investigate. We wondered if the increase was real, Dr. Byrd said. Maybe we were doing a better job of finding cases. Maybe there was an increase in awareness of autism. The movie `Rain Man' was very popular. California has a system of 21 regional centers that diagnose developmental disorders and provide services to children with them. Dr. Byrd and his team mined these centers for data. Researchers sent questionnaires to the parents of 684 children with full-spectrum autism or mental retardation. About half were teenagers, born from 1983 to 1985; the others were ages 7 to 9, born a decade later. If the criteria for diagnosing autism had changed in those 10 years or if the definition had broadened, the mystery would be solved, Dr. Byrd said. But the standards used to diagnose full-spectrum autism were the same in both age groups, he said. Some people suggested that the centers might diagnose autism so families would receive more generous state assistance. But the centers have no incentive to do so, Dr. Byrd said, since they do not receive more state financing for identifying more children with disabilities. The study also considered whether children in the older group were incorrectly classified as mentally retarded, when they were in fact autistic. But the rate of misdiagnosis was about the same in both groups, Dr. Byrd said. Still another possibility - that large numbers of families with autistic children had moved into California - was discarded when it turned out that most children in both groups were born in California. A general increase in population accounted for about 10 percent of the rise in autism, Dr. Byrd said. The rest remains a mystery. There also were no significant differences over time in sex, race or parental education. Parents of the older children were more likely to report mental retardation along with autism, but the finding did not explain the rising incidence. About a third of parents in both groups reported that their children began to regress around the age of 18 months, Dr. Byrd said. They suddenly lost the ability to say words and stopped making eye contact. Many
[CTRL] NYTimes.com Article: Ex-Fugitive Is Convicted in 25-Year-Old Murder
-Caveat Lector- This article from NYTimes.com has been sent to you by [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ex-Fugitive Is Convicted in 25-Year-Old Murder October 18, 2002 By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS PHILADELPHIA, Oct. 17 (AP) - Ira Einhorn, a former counterculture leader who preached peace and love while battering his lovers, was convicted today of first-degree murder for killing a former girlfriend in 1977 and stuffing her body into his closet. Mr. Einhorn, who fled the country and spent nearly 17 years in Europe after being arrested in the death of Holly Maddux, was sentenced to life in prison without parole. After the verdict, Judge William J. Mazzola called Mr. Einhorn, 62, an intellectual dilettante who preyed on the uninitiated, uninformed, unsuspecting and inexperienced. Mr. Einhorn's lawyer, William T. Cannon, said he planned an appeal. In the 1970's, Mr. Einhorn counted Jerry Rubin and the rock star Peter Gabriel among his acquaintances and later consulted with large companies on New Age trends. He vanished on the eve of his 1981 trial and lived in England, Ireland and Sweden before the authorities caught him in 1997 at a converted windmill in the south of France, where he lived with his Swedish-born wife. After his capture, Mr. Einhorn thumbed his nose at American authorities by appearing on television shows to discuss his plight and sipping wine while posing naked for photographers in his garden. For the first time in his spoiled, selfish, egotistical life, he pays the price, the victim's brother, John Maddux, said. Mr. Einhorn insisted he was innocent, saying he last saw Ms. Maddux, 30, as she left to make a phone call. He said he had no idea how her body had turned up in a steamer trunk inside his closet. Prosecutors described Mr. Einhorn as a loutish womanizer and serial abuser who turned violent whenever a woman wanted to leave him. When he testified, they had him read poems and diary entries in which he wrote: to kill what you love when you can't have it seems so natural and violence always marks the end of a relationship. Mr. Einhorn, who had described himself as a planetary enzyme and a catalyst for change, told jurors he had a Virgo moon. Lynne Abraham, the Philadelphia district attorney, whose office pursued Mr. Einhorn for years, said, Metaphorically speaking, Ira Einhorn and his Virgo moon are toast. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/18/national/18EINH.html?ex=1035948485ei=1en=09d0df8f3bae7404 HOW TO ADVERTISE - For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters or other creative advertising opportunities with The New York Times on the Web, please contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit our online media kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo For general information about NYTimes.com, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A 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://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]/A http://archive.jab.org/ctrl;listserv.aol.com/ A HREF=http://archive.jab.org/ctrl;listserv.aol.com/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] NYTimes.com Article: Sniper Case Renews Debate Over Firearm Fingerprinting
-Caveat Lector- This article from NYTimes.com has been sent to you by [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sniper Case Renews Debate Over Firearm Fingerprinting October 18, 2002 By FOX BUTTERFIELD WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 - The sniper shootings in the suburbs of Washington have produced an intense debate over whether the government should create a nationwide database of ballistic fingerprints, electronic images of the unique markings that every gun makes on the bullet it fires and the shell ejected from it. While the debate, like many gun issues, is clouded by ideology, much of the argument is over how well such a system would work. Firearms experts say a national database of ballistic fingerprints would be practical, accurate and a major help to law enforcement. What a fabulous opportunity it would be to have a system that gave you the make, model and possibly the purchaser of a gun, just from a shell casing ejected at the crime scene, said Randy Rossi, the director of the firearms division of the California Department of Justice. It would be just like a criminal leaving his license plate at the crime scene. You can't question the technology, Mr. Rossi said. It is already being used to solve hundreds or thousands of cases. But questioning the technology was exactly what President Bush's press secretary, Ari Fleischer, did on Monday when he repeated the doubts that the National Rifle Association has long expressed about such a system. The more a gun is used, Mr. Fleischer said, the less accurate the tracing can become. In addition, he said, A simple nail file put down the barrel of a gun can alter the amount of tracing that's on a bullet, and therefore change the accuracy of fingerprinting, very unlike any fingerprinting of human beings. What is needed is not new gun laws, Mr. Fleischer said. Certainly, in the case of the sniper, the issue is values. Despite the skepticism, Mr. Fleischer said later that Mr. Bush favored studying such a system, as the N.R.A. has also proposed. Part of the technology is already in place, known as the National Integrated Ballistic Identification Network. It has allowed the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms to say with certainty that the 11 people shot by the Washington-area sniper were shot with the same gun, using .223-caliber ammunition. In some cities, including New York, law enforcement officials have already made more than 700 matches of bullets or shell casings recovered in crimes to guns since the system was put into place in 1996, said Joe Vince, the former head of the crime gun analysis branch at the agency. Mr. Vince helped develop the system. In Houston, the police recently solved the killing of a security guard and the separate killings of two store clerks in an armed robbery by matching the shell casings in the three killings to a .40-caliber gun. The weapon was eventually found in the apartment of a suspect. With the ballistics evidence, the suspect was convicted and sentenced to death. But the National Rifle Association has many arguments against such a system. In a statement released today, Wayne LaPierre, the executive vice president of the group, said gun fingerprinting would not work if a criminal deformed the barrel of a gun or its firing pin. Nor would it work if a gun was stolen, Mr. LaPierre said, because gun tracing by the firearms bureau can track a gun only to the buyer. The rifle association says that most guns used by criminals are stolen. The proposed system would also fail unless the 200 million guns already owned by Americans were test fired and had their bullets and shell casings entered into the database, Mr. LaPierre said. If that happened, the system would be tantamount to national gun registration, which the rifle association considers a first step toward government confiscation of firearms, he said. Mr. Vince said of Mr. Fleischer's doubts: All I can say is, the White House must have been misinformed. Every study ever done on this has shown that it is an extremely effective system. The technology, developed by a Canadian company, Forensic Technology Inc., is used in 27 countries, including Germany, Sweden, Spain, Italy, Israel, Thailand and Australia, said Pete Gagliardi, a vice president of the company and a former high-ranking firearms bureau agent. All these countries use the technology as the United States does, just to match bullets or shell casings to a crime gun. None have created a national database. As for Mr. Fleischer's claim that the rifling marks on a bullet degrade when a gun is fired often, Mr. Vince said, We test-fired a gun 5,000 times, and the technology was able to match the first round with the last round. He added: But no one shoots a gun that many times anyway. A criminal might fire 10 or 20 times with the same gun. If a criminal put a nail file down the barrel of a gun, as Mr. Fleischer suggested, the technology would pick this up, Mr. Vince said. Moreover, he said, the firearms bureau has found that
