[CTRL] The Roots of Evil in Jerusalem
-Caveat Lector- Gee, those Rothschilds are everywhere. More evidence that Israel is ruled by the Illuminati. But then again the Rothchild's Heraldry, the Seal of Solomon, the Hexagram has been on the flag of Israel since her beginning. The Roots of Evil in Jerusalem http://www.rense.com/general44/gikdeb.htm -iNFoWaRZ www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] Lawmakers Approve Expansion of F.B.I.'s Antiterrorism Powers
-Caveat Lector- http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/20/national/20TERR.html?pagewanted=printposition= November 20, 2003 Lawmakers Approve Expansion of F.B.I.'s Antiterrorism PowersBy ERIC LICHTBLAU ASHINGTON, Nov. 19 Congressional negotiators approved a measure on Wednesday to expand the F.B.I.'s counterterrorism powers, despite concerns from some lawmakers who said that the measure gave the government too much authority and that the public had been shut out of the debate. The measure gives the Federal Bureau of Investigation greater authority to demand records from businesses in terrorism cases without the approval of a judge or a grand jury. While banks, credit unions and other financial institutions are currently subject to such demands, the measure expands the list to include car dealers, pawnbrokers, travel agents, casinos and other businesses. The expansion, included in the 2004 authorization bill for intelligence agencies, has already been approved by both the House and the Senate, and lawmakers from both chambers approved the provision as part of the larger bill in a private session late Wednesday, officials said. Law enforcement officials said the F.B.I. would gain greater speed and flexibility in tracing suspected terrorist money. Senator Richard J. Durbin, Democrat of Illinois, introduced a motion to limit the life of the new law, but it was defeated on a party-line vote. "I'm concerned about this," Mr. Durbin said in an interview. "The idea of expanding the powers of government gives everyone pause except the Republican leadership." The approval came despite 11th-hour concerns raised by five Democrats and a Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, who questioned why their panel which has responsibility for overseeing the F.B.I. was shut out of any discussion on the little-noticed proposal. In a letter this week to the Senate intelligence committee, the senators urged the panel, which does much of its work in secret, not to move ahead with such a significant expansion of the F.B.I.'s powers without further review. They said public hearings, public debate and legislative protocol were essential in legislation involving the privacy rights of Americans. The letter was signed by Senator Larry E. Craig, Republican of Idaho, and five Democrats: Mr. Durbin, and Senators Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, Russell D. Feingold of Wisconsin, Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts and John Edwards of North Carolina. Copyright 2003The New York Times Company | Home | Privacy Policy | Search | Corrections | Help | Back to Top www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substanceânot soap-boxingâplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'âwith its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsâis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] Lawmakers Approve Expansion of F.B.I.'s Antiterrorism Powers
-Caveat Lector- In a message dated 11/20/2003 7:19:43 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: November 20, 2003 Lawmakers Approve Expansion of F.B.I.'s Antiterrorism PowersBy ERIC LICHTBLAU ASHINGTON, Nov. 19 Congressional negotiators approved a measure on Wednesday to expand the F.B.I.'s counterterrorism powers, despite concerns from some lawmakers who said that the measure gave the government too much authority and that the public had been shut out of the debate. Well I wondered what was going on behind the clatter of the medicare and energy stuff. Now we know. I think the FBI should know everything about us as long as Bill Clinton doesn't ask to see it. I think he's the only one the public was worried about having access to FBI records, wasn't he? Prudy www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om inline: logoprinter.gifinline: in_america_pf_1.gifinline: w.gif
Re: [CTRL] Israel Angers the Bush Administration (Jane's)
-Caveat Lector- In a message dated 11/19/2003 11:26:38 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ariel Sharon is surely feeling lonely these days. Tension is building between him and the Bush administration, which feels that mounting Muslim hostility toward the USA, and particularly its troubled occupation of Iraq, is being fuelled by Israel's treatment of the Palestinians. Oh heavens, how could anyone think that? Prudy www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] War critics astonished as US hawk admits invasion was illegal
-Caveat Lector- In a message dated 11/19/2003 11:08:50 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But Mr Perle, a key member of the defence policy board, which advises the US defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, said that "international law ... would have required us to leave Saddam Hussein alone", and this would have been morally unacceptable. Especially since Israel had Iraq at the top of the list. Prudy www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] The Bush Team Inside the Bubble (Maureen Dowd)
Title: The Buck House Stops Here -Caveat Lector- http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/20/opinion/20DOWD.html?th=pagewanted=printposition= November 20, 2003 The Buck House Stops HereBy MAUREEN DOWD ASHINGTON President Bush thought he had at last found someplace even more sequestered from the real world than the Republican fund-raisers and conservative think tanks where he makes his carefully controlled "public" appearances. Swaddled in the $8.5 million security blanket of reinforced concrete, wire mesh and 14,000 bobbies designed to protect him from the ungrateful citizens of our one I mean, our closest ally, Mr. Bush was a blithe spirit in his rented tails with his English cousins behind the high gates of Buckingham Palace. Even sheltered in the bosom of the British royal family, however, Mr. Bush wasn't entirely safe. Wearing a blue sash and a tiara with enough diamonds to pay for a year of the Iraqi occupation, the British queen gave the American president a bit of a poke, a light sideswipe with her handbag, as it were. In her remarks honoring Mr. Bush at the state dinner last night, Queen Elizabeth unleashed a barrage of favorable references to the most dreaded words in the Bush-Cheney lexicon: "multilateral order," "trans-Atlantic partnership," "other allies" and "effective international institutions." "At the very core of the new international and multilateral order, which emerged after the shared sacrifices of that last terrible world war, was a vital dynamic trans-Atlantic partnership working with other allies to create effective international institutions," she said. This, to a president who has never met an international institution he did not try to wreck and who's darting around like a fugitive in the land of the "special relationship," using Buck House as a safe house. Her Majesty barely mentioned the pesky colonial mess in Iraq where U.S. occupiers are also surrounded by razor wire, concrete barricades and armed guards and spent more time praising the first President Bush's leadership than the second's. Everything Mr. Bush did in London reinforced the idea that this was a trip made not so much to thank the British people for their friendship, but to send a message to the voters back home that he was at ease as a world leader. The White House spared Mr. Bush from having to endure a session with the rowdy Parliament and flew him by helicopter over the protesting rabble, who think a bullying Bush administration dragged Britain into the war under false pretenses. (Scotland Yard even wanted to keep the president in a "mobile-free bubble" that would block cellphone calls in his vicinity, but the phone companies refused, calling it "Bush hysteria.") The White House packaged the visit for the viewers at home. How else to explain the same Bush advance geniuses who brought us the "Mission Accomplished" banner putting up a blue PowerPoint-ish backdrop for the president's speech at Whitehall Palace that stuttered, "United Kingdom," "United Kingdom," "United Kingdom." The people in the United Kingdom already knew he was in the United Kingdom. And the kingdom isn't very united at the moment. Ken Livingstone, the mayor of London, captured the spirit of the moment when he told NPR that the Republican National Committee should foot the bill for Mr. Bush's extraordinary security, the largest police operation ever in Great Britain. All this, he harrumphed, "just so George Bush can use a few clips of him and the queen in his campaign advertisements for re-election next year." There was a dispiriting contrast between G.W.B. shutting out the world and avoiding the British public, and the black-and-white clips this week of J.F.K. reaching out to the world and being adored by Berliners. There was also a dispiriting contrast between the Bush administration, hiding the returning coffins of U.S. soldiers and avoiding their funerals, and the moving pictures of the Italian politicians and people, honoring their dead with public ceremonies and a week of mourning. The bubble in London is just an extension of the bubble the Bush team lives in at home. It superimposes its reality on the evidence for war, the ease of the occupation, the strength of the insurgency and the continuing threat from Saddam and Osama. Isolationism has been a foreign policy before. But for this administration, it seems to be a way of life. Copyright 2003The New York Times Company | Home | Privacy
[CTRL] Unheeded Advice on Saddam
-Caveat Lector- ~~for educational purposes only~~ [Title 17 U.S.C. section 107] Unheeded Advice on Saddam by Ralph R. Reiland How many additional American lives is Saddam Hussein worth? The answer I would give is not very damn many. That was the answer from Dick Cheney during a May 1992 briefing, explaining why the first President Bush was right when he decided not to push forward to Baghdad to get rid of Saddam after American forces had trounced the Iraqi army in Kuwait in March 1991. At the time of that briefing, Cheney was secretary of defense, fresh from his task of directing Operation Desert Storm. In his 1998 memoir, A World Transformed co-authored with Brent Scowcroft, his former national security adviser, the senior Bush explained why he didn't send American troops to march into Baghdad to bring down Saddam at the end of the Gulf War: To occupy Iraq would instantly shatter our coalition, turning the whole Arab world against us, and make a broken tyrant into a latter-day Arab hero. It would have taken us way beyond the imprimatur of international law bestowed by the resolutions of the Security Council, assigning young soldiers to a fruitless hunt for a securely entrenched dictator and condemning them to fight in what would be an unwinnable urban guerrilla war. It could only plunge that part of the world into even greater instability and destroy the credibility we were working so hard to re-establish. On top of being unwinnable, Bush warned that the costs of an occupation of Iraq would be incalculable, with meager benefits: Trying to eliminate Saddam, extending the ground war into an occupation of Iraq, would have violated our guideline about not changing objectives in midstream, engaging in 'mission creep,' and would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible. We had been unable to find Noriega in Panama, which we knew intimately. We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq. The coalition would instantly have collapsed, the Arabs deserting it in anger, and other allies pulling out as well. Under those circumstances, there was no viable 'exit strategy' we could see, violating another of our principles. Furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-Cold War world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the United Nations' mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression that we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the United States could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land. That was 1998, and not everyone agreed. A group of Washington heavyweights, including Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Bill Kristol and Dick Cheney, formed The Project for the New American Century in spring 1997, with an early focus on ousting Saddam Hussein by force, if necessary. On Jan. 26, 1998, the group wrote to President Bill Clinton, urging him to adopt a strategy that would aim, above all, at the removal of Saddam Hussein's regime from power. Arguing that we didn't have the ability to ensure that Saddam Hussein is not producing weapons of mass destruction, they asked Clinton to adopt a willingness to undertake military action, as diplomacy is clearly failing. Writing to Rep. Newt Gingrich and Sen. Trent Lott in May 1998, the group argued that the United States should be prepared to use military force to protect our vital interests in the Gulf and, if necessary, to help remove Saddam from power. All that war hype, of course, was years before Sept. 11, years before Dick Cheney claimed that Iraq was the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault for many years, long before Condoleezza Rice was seeing mushroom clouds over Chicago. On Sept. 11, according to a report from National Security correspondent David Martin at CBS, it took barely five hours after American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon for Defense Secretary Rumsfeld to tell his aides to come up with plans for striking Iraq even though there was no evidence connecting Saddam to the attack. Notes taken by the Pentagon aides, at 2:40 p.m. on Sept. 11, quote Rumsfeld as saying he wanted best info fast. Judge whether good enough hit S.H, meaning Saddam Hussein. Go massive, the notes quote Rumsfeld as saying. Sweep it all up. Things related and not. And so, as they say, the rest is history, produced and directed by the guys in the White House from the Project for the New American Century, with no reports of the son getting any briefings about what his father had warned against. www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and
[CTRL] On the Neocon Use of Leaks (Jim Lobe)
Title: Asia Times - Asia's most trusted news source for the Middle East -Caveat Lector- ''It's obvious that if you cared about the real national security interests of this country, you wouldn't reveal an asset,'' said Goodman. ''That shows this is a venal and desperate group who are not considering the real national-security interests of this country.'' http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK21Ak01.html Asia Times November 21, 2003 Middle East The truth leaks outBy Jim Lobe WASHINGTON - This week's blockbuster leak of a secret memorandum from a senior Pentagon official to the US Senate Intelligence Committee has spurred speculation that neo- conservative hawks in the Bush administration are on the defensive and growing more desperate. Both the committee and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) have asked the Justice Department to launch an investigation of the leak, which took the form of an article published Monday by the influential neo-conservative journal, The Weekly Standard. Committee chairman Pat Roberts characterized the leak as ''egregious'', noting that it might have compromised ''highly classified information'' on intelligence sources and methods of collecting information, as well as ongoing investigations. He also said he did not believe the leak came from his committee or its staff. The Pentagon issued an unusual press statement declaring that the leak was ''deplorable and may be illegal''. The Weekly Standard article, "Case Closed", is a summary of a lengthy memo sent to the committee October 27 by Undersecretary of Defence for Policy Douglas Feith. He had been asked by the senators to provide support for his assertion in a closed hearing in July that US intelligence agencies had established a long-standing operational link between the al-Qaeda terrorist group and Baghdad. That, and similar assertions by senior Bush officials before the war, have long been considered questionable, more so after the war when the administration - as with its pre-war contentions about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction (WMD) - failed to come up with evidence to back its case. Investigative reporters and Iraq war critics have accused Feith's office of having manipulated or ''cherry-picked'' the intelligence on Iraq's purported ties to al-Qaeda and WMD programs before the war to persuade Bush and the public that Saddam posed a serious threat to the United States. The leaked memo consists mainly of 50 excerpts culled from raw intelligence reports by four US intelligence agencies about alleged al-Qaeda-Iraqi contacts from 1990 to 2003. Some of the reports include brief analysis, but most cite accounts by unnamed sources, such as ''a contact with good access'', ''a well placed source'', ''a former senior Iraqi intelligence officer'', a ''regular and reliable source'', ''sensitive CIA reporting'', and ''a foreign government service''. Although the article's author, Weekly Standard correspondent Stephen Hayes, concludes that much of the evidence is ''detailed, conclusive, and corroborated by multiple sources'', the only example of real corroboration is with respect to several reports regarding contacts between al-Qaeda and Iraqi agents in Afghanistan in 1999. Most of the excerpts deal instead with alleged meetings or less direct contacts in which sources claim that al-Qaeda agents are requesting certain kinds of assistance, such as a safe haven, training or, in one case, WMD. While supporters of the war in Iraq, such as the New York Times' William Safire, have jumped on the Hayes article as proof of what the administration had alleged, retired intelligence officers have criticized it, both because of the security breach of the leak itself and because its contents are anything but ''conclusive'' of an operational relationship. W Patrick Lang, former head of the Middle East section of the Defence Intelligence Agency, told the Washington Post the article amounted to a ''listing of a mass of unconfirmed reports, many of which themselves indicate that the two groups continued to try to establish some sort of relationship''. At the same time, he added, it
[CTRL] [LIFE-GAZETTE] Re: [bcrants] Fwd: Re: American Inquisition (fwd)
-Caveat Lector- -- Forwarded message -- Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 09:21:32 -0800 (PST) From: Party of Citizens [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Linda J. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: BC Rants [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [LIFE-GAZETTE] Re: [bcrants] Fwd: Re: American Inquisition Do you really think anyone calling himself or herself a Christian today knows how the Almighty wants humankind to live on this planet? If so, just tell us at http://www.UniverCity.ca. Tell us what one shining city on a hill (in this case Burnaby Mountain) plus surroundings would be like. POC * http://www.geocities.com/CITIZENS_ASSEMBLY ** $$$ Capital punishment is not just penalty for poverty$$$ On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, Linda J. wrote: Scary. what are we coming to? ==BEGIN FORWARDED MESSAGE== The American Inquisition Has Begun By Chuck Baldwin Food For Thought From The Chuck Wagon November 15, 2003 I was in attendance at Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore´s trial in Montgomery this past Wednesday and Thursday. Trial is not really the proper word, however. A better word is inquisition. There was never a doubt that the judges had made up their minds to remove Chief Justice Moore from the bench before the proceedings ever began. They sat like wooden Indians throughout the trial, taking few notes and, with only one exception, making no comments, and asking no questions. Furthermore, Moore´s attorneys had some 20 pieces of evidentiary material that they could have presented. This was denied. There were also several credible witnesses, including former Alabama Governor Fob James, that could have been called to testify on Moore´s behalf. This was also denied. The trial took upon itself a distinctive tone of inquisition when Alabama Attorney General Bill Pryor questioned Chief Justice Moore. Here is an exchange between Pryor and Moore taken from the official transcript of the trial: Pryor: Mr. Chief Justice? And your understanding is that the Federal court ordered that you could not acknowledge God; isn´t that right? Moore: Yes. Pryor: And if you resume your duties as Chief Justice after this proceeding, you will continue to acknowledge God as you have testified that you would today--- Moore: That´s right. Pryor: ---no matter what any other official says? Moore: Absolutely. (Chief Justice Moore then elaborated.) Pryor: The only point I am trying to clarify, Mr. Chief Justice, is not why, but only that, in fact, if you do resume your duties as Chief Justice, you will continue to do that [acknowledge God] without regard to what any other official says; isn´t that right? Moore: (He responds by listing numerous examples of the public acknowledgement of God, and concluded answering the question.) I think you must. Does any reader of this exchange not see what Bill Pryor was demanding? He was demanding that Chief Justice Roy Moore not acknowledge God! Pryor did not even refer to the Ten Commandments. He repeatedly asked Moore if he would continue to acknowledge God. To acknowledge God was deemed an impermissible activity and for this Roy Moore was removed as Alabama Chief Justice. Watching Bill Pryor examine Roy Moore in such a fashion reminded me of the movie Luther. It was shockingly similar to the moment when the great reformer stood in front of the Roman council and heard the inquisitor shout, Will you recant? Will you recant? Will you recant? It is more than interesting that Bill Pryor asked Chief Justice Moore three times whether he would continue to acknowledge God, because Satan asked the Lord Jesus three times to fall down and worship him, and Simon Peter denied Christ three times. There does seem to be a pattern! The point that all Americans must understand is that Chief Justice Roy Moore was removed from the bench, not for committing any crime, not for participating in unethical conduct, and not even for posting the Ten Commandments in the Alabama Judicial Building. He was removed from office for acknowledging God! Americans must understand that people such as judge Myron Thompson and Alabama Attorney General Bill Pryor actually believe that the public acknowledgement of God is illegal activity. Even more dangerous, they believe that a federal judge´s order, not the U.S. Constitution, is the supreme law of the land. Pryor said as much during the trial. There is yet another similarity of Roy Moore´s trial to a Dark Ages-style inquisition. Not only was he commanded to recant his public acknowledgment of God, the trial itself was conducted out of public view. No television cameras or recording devices were allowed. Obviously, the inquisitors did not want the American
[CTRL] When you wish beyond a star ....
-Caveat Lector- -- Forwarded message -- Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 09:17:47 -0800 (PST) From: Party of Citizens [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [LIFE-GAZETTE] Intelligent Design IS Theory Also, let's consider Professor Lamoureux's statement to Valery Pringle that intelligent design is not a theory. What is a theory? If a forensic scientist says the Zodiak Killer was not one person but a cult, that is a theory. Can it be proven to be true or false? is one POSSIBLE inclusion among the criteria for theory. But one might also say the essence of a theory is whether it is TRUE OR FALSE, irrespective of whether we can now or ever prove it to be true or false. We homo saps have only been on this planet for a tiny fraction of one tour of the galactic centre which takes over 200,000,000 years whether you reckon our beginning by Biblical literalism or conventional paleontology. Where will we be in 200,000,000 years? Maybe exploring nearby galaxies and seeding them with new species created by our intelligent design. Also wondering when we encounter inhabited planets whether our theory is true or false that the creatING entity responsible for those inhabited planets is in the next galaxy over, or the one beyond that or perhaps way out near the edge of the universe. Or maybe BEYOND the edge of the universe. Maybe we can't determine if those theories about intelligent design in Andromeda are correct or not. Maybe the limits of the human brain will forever prevent us from understanding, whereas more intelligent life forms out there may surpass those limits. Nevertheless, inherent human stupidity should not prevent us from considering that it may be TRUE that there is a creatING entity beyond the furthest star. POC When you wish beyond a star, Makes no difference who you are On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, citizens wrote: Of the three forces which shape life forms according to the Darwinian perspective, only mutation can possibly explain how we might get from the skeleton of a snake to that of a dog for example. All the migration and selection in the world is not going to do the job. How many successful skeletal mutations have been produced in biology labs? What is the ratio of successful to unsuccessful mutations in those labs? Why is the bone fossil record not cluttered up with the huge number of failures we would predict from a Darwinian perspective? Zandu Goldbar [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] * What would a Model City plus surroundings for Good Doers of the Axis of Good be like, vs. a contrasting city for Evil Doers in the Axis of Evil? * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-- Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark Printer at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US Canada. http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511 http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/wpWolB/TM -~- * What would a Model City plus surroundings for Good Doers of the Axis of Good be like, vs. a contrasting city for Evil Doers in the Axis of Evil? * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] The Media Blackout of 9/11 (Eric Alterman)
-Caveat Lector- If there is nothing conspiratorial about 911, then why are the neocon-dominated media making such a heavy-handed effort to block any honest investigation into the facts about what occurred? Could the situation be any more obvious to any skeptical person with common sense? What precisely arethe neocon/neolib mediatrying to hide? Under normal circumstances wouldn't one expect the media to exhibit intense curiosity about the detailed circumstances of an event with the historical impact of 911? http://progressivetrail.org/articles/031120Alterman.shtml November 20, 2003 The Media blackout of 9/11 by Eric AltermanPublished by Center for American ProgressSometimes, as Matthew Yglesias pointed out last week, its what they dont say. And when its Fox News keeping mum, you better listen hard. Following the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, Congress over intense White House objections - created an independent, 10-person commission to investigate the bombings that took nearly 3,000 lives. In the tradition of the Warren Commission, and the inquiries into Pearl Harbor, the 9/11 commission would offer up the definitive take on the historic tragedy, and provide key assessments so America was never caught off guard again. And it would do that by combing through millions of documents, with unfettered access. Thomas Kean, former New Jersey Republican governor whos chairing the commission, recently reported its engaged in "the largest investigation of the United States government in United States history." This may read well on paper. But Kean and company have been forced to grovel not only for enough money to do the job, but also for access to key White House documents, most notably sensitive (read: embarrassing) presidential daily briefings, and specifically any from the summer of 2001 that appear to have warned Bush about an imminent and spectacular al Qaida attack inside the United States. (Bush decided to spend the rest of the day fishing on his ranch following the still-secret briefing.) Last week a deal was finally struck, giving a small number of commissioners access to the most sensitive documents, and letting them, in effect, report back to the entire panel about what they saw. Some victims family members labeled the backroom deal a charade. Either way, the 9/11 commission qualifies as news, or so one would think. Well, not at Bush-friendly Fox News. On-air reports about the 9/11 commission have been as common as anchors with bad teeth or academics with leftward leanings; in other words, not very. ...' Fox has treated viewers to a virtual news blackout on commission-related news. And if this has been an accident, it has to be one of the most amazing news-gathering coincidences in cable history. All of Foxs marquee programs - Hannity Colmes, The OReilly Factor, Special Report with Brit Hume, The Beltway Boys, The Big Show with John Gibson, Fox News Sunday, and Your World with Neil Cavuto - have managed to avoid the 9/11 commission as if it were a Dan Quayle spellathon. Its been a year since the 9/11 inquiry was formed (did we mention the Bush White House objected to it?), even tried to appoint Mr. Official Secrecy, Henry Kissinger, to head it? During this time, the above mentioned Fox shows have aired at least 1,300 episodes and welcomed, Im guessing, 4,000 guests. (Not 4,000 separate individuals, since lots of people are repeat guests. But 4,000 separate bookings nonetheless.) How many of those 4,000 were invited to discuss the 9/11 commission? Five percent? One percent? According to a Nexis search, the number hovers closer .1 and .2 percent of the guests, or perhaps 10 people, tops. And were being generous, because among several of those 10, the 9/11 commission came up only in passing. As for guests invited on exclusively by Fox to talk about the commission, its investigation, and its battles with the White House? The number is closer to zero. (Thats snake eyes if youre reading, Bill.) Are we picking unfairly on Fox? Perhaps. Unfortunately, most of mainstream media have done a spotty job covering the commission, with some notable exceptions being the AP, the Dallas Morning News and the Newark Star-Ledger. (For Nexis heads out there, the search of 9/11 commission and Fox News for the last 12 months captured 21 transcript matches, no matter how fleeting the on-air reference was, compared to 63 matches for 9/11 commission and CNN.) Even so, if your ambition were to watch your post-9/11 news in a 9/11 commission-free zone, while you chose instead to direct peoples attention away from any failures that may have left the nation vulnerable and instead convince the country to focus on say, an imaginary threat from Iraq, Fox would consistently been the best choice. And perhaps no place on Fox has would have been safer than Bill OReillys no-spin zone. This sounds a bit weird, I know. After all, right? OReilly insists hes not a
Re: [CTRL] Israel Angers the Bush Administration (Jane's)
-Caveat Lector- Ariel Sharon is surely feeling lonely these days. Tension is building between him and the Bush administration, which feels that mounting Muslim hostility toward the USA, and particularly its troubled occupation of Iraq, is being fuelled by Israel's treatment of the Palestinians. Oh heavens, how could anyone think that? Prudy Are you saying that the perfect state of Isreael isnt treating Palastinians well. Be careful Prudy youd be labeld an Anti-Semite for saying Israel isnt perfect! www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] Bush rape lawsuit, Priest stole accused murderer, rapist 32 years, Masons
-Caveat Lector- also has 'Enemy Combatant' Sham Authorities Eye Whether Rush Limbaugh Laundered Money Used to Pay for Drugs Records of the Central Intelligence Agency Freemasons on Assembly agenda scroll for news articles I have been told that the rape lawsuit against Bush is at : http://ccweb.co.fort-bend.tx.us/imgcache/civil1986144-1-7.pdf two fwd from L Moss Sharman Slay suspect's ties to priest, psychologist investigated By Anne Barnard, Globe Staff, 11/20/03 "Investigators probing the death of a 20-year-old Cape Cod man are seeking to learn whether his accused killer, a convicted child rapist, had a sexual relationship with a priest and psychologist who counseled him in prison and advocated for his release. Two former workers at the sex offender treatment center where Paul Nolin was incarcerated for 12 years said investigators recently asked them for details of Nolin's relationship with the Rev. Donald A. Turlick, a licensed psychologist who was Nolin's therapist at the center. Paula Erickson, a former counselor at the Massachusetts Treatment Center for the Sexually Dangerous in Bridgewater, said she told investigators that Turlick brought in contraband for Nolin, including condoms, silk pajamas, and gold chains, and that it was well known in the facility that Nolin and Turlick were "an item." http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2003/11/20/slay_suspects_ties_to_priest_psychologist_investigated/ Priest sued for swindle: Accused killer's pal eyed for stealing at least $50G by Dave Wedge 11/20/03 "An embattled priest with close ties to accused killer Paul Nolin pocketed more than $50,000 in church cash and is being sued by the Diocese of Fall River, according to records obtained by the Herald. The Rev. Bernard Kelly is under investigation by Cape Cod prosecutors and is expected to face charges he swindled St. Joseph's out of thousands of dollars during his six-year tenure at the Woods Hole church, according to his attorney, Frank O'Boy." http://www2.bostonherald.com/news/local_regional/kell11202003.htm this has descriptions of abuse Father sentenced to unprecedented 32 years in jail for raping daughters 11/20/03 By David Ratner "A 59-year-old man was sentenced to 32 years in jail for raping his four daughters over a period of several years. Haifa District Court also sentenced him to pay NIS 50,000 compensation to each of his daughters, the youngest of whom is 21 and the eldest in her 30s." http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/363038.html http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/19/opinion/19WED3.html?ex=1070316055ei=1en=5714ab30f06f33bc 'Enemy Combatant' Sham Published: November 19, 2003 The Bush administration insists that it can hold American citizens in secret as long as it wants, without access to lawyers, simply by calling them "enemy combatants." A New York federal appeals court heard a challenge to that policy this week by the so-called dirty bomber, Jose Padilla. The administration's position makes a mockery of the Constitution and puts every American's liberty at risk. It is important that the court strike it down, and give Mr. Padilla the rights he has been denied. Mr. Padilla is an American citizen who was taken into custody in Chicago in May 2002. The government suspects him of being part of a "dirty bomb" plot by Al Qaeda, but it has not charged him. Instead, it has labeled him an enemy combatant and locked him up in a naval brig in South Carolina. He has been held there nearly 18 months, with no indication of when he will be tried or released. He has not been allowed to meet with a lawyer, despite a lower court ruling that he should be. Of all the post-Sept. 11 denials of civil liberties, the enemy combatant doctrine is among the worst. It gives the president untrammeled authority to lock up Americans merely by asserting that they are part of a terrorist plot. In its argument to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit this week, the government insisted that military-style rules like the enemy combatant doctrine now apply to American citizens, even on American soil, because Al Qaeda has "made the battlefield the United States." http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/112003F.shtml Money Matters By Brian Ross ABC News Wednesday 19 November 2003 Authorities Eye Whether Rush Limbaugh Laundered Money Used to Pay for Drugs Nov. 18 Radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh may have violated state money-laundering laws in the way he handled the money he used to buy the prescription drugs to which he was addicted, law enforcement officials in Florida and New York told ABCNEWS. A conviction on such charges in Florida would be a first-degree felony, punishable by up to 30 years in prison. Limbaugh returned to the airwaves this week after five weeks of rehabilitation for his admitted addiction to prescription painkillers. Records of the Central Intelligence Agency [CIA] (Record Group 263) 1894-1993 (bulk 1947-74)
[CTRL] Hollinger Woes Casting a Pall Over Future of Neocon Papers (Forward)
Title: FORWARD : News -Caveat Lector- http://www.forward.com/issues/2003/03.11.21/news3.hollinger.html NOVEMBER 21, 2003 | current issue | back issues | subscribe | Hollinger Woes Casting a Pall Over Future of Neocon Papers By NATHANIEL POPPER FORWARD STAFF A convergence of unrelated financial scandals is threatening to sink the tiny but influential boat of Jewish-flavored conservative journalism. At the center of the controversy is Hollinger International, a media company that owns dozens of conservative newspapers, including the hawkish Jerusalem Post. An internal investigation into improper payments allegedly made to Hollinger's majority owner and CEO, Conrad Black, and its president, F. David Radler, has triggered a major reorganization of the company. Radler, who oversaw the Jerusalem Post, has resigned. Black has stepped down as CEO, but will continue to play a role in planning what is expected to be a mass sell-off of the company's media holdings. Many media insiders are predicting the shakeup will lead to the sale of most Hollinger-controlled newspapers, including The Jerusalem Post, The Daily Telegraph of London and the Chicago Sun-Times. Hollinger also owns a piece of The New York Sun, which was launched in 2002 by former Forward editor Seth Lipsky. Though ostensibly a general interest newspaper, the Sun is best known for its pugnacious coverage of Jewish-related issues, as well as its neo-conservative policy positions. Hollinger's stake in the Sun is relatively small, but financial problems have also threatened Roger Hertog, the newspaper's main financial backer and also a part-owner of The New Republic, a highly influential Washington-based opinion journal with a heavy interest in Jewish issues. Hertog's potential troubles relate to his post as vice chairman of Alliance Capital. The company is being investigated by New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer for improper trading moves and has put aside $190 million to cover restitution and legal costs relating to the case. Alliance Capital is also being investigated by the Securities and Exchange Commission for payments to Morgan Stanley to obtain preferred status with investors. Some of the allegations at Alliance Capital surround suspicious trading activity at mutual funds it purchased from the company of the late Jewish philanthropist Zalman Bernstein, where Hertog was formerly president and CEO. A financially induced collapse at the Sun or political shift to the left at The Jerusalem Post would represent a severe blow to conservative Jewish activists who have come to depend these publications as dependable allies in various policy fights. Since it is not yet clear how, and whether, the troubles at Alliance Capital will affect Hertog, for now the more furious speculation is focused on Hollinger and the fate of The Jerusalem Post. "This is one of the most famous brand names in Israel alongside Jaffa oranges," said one former employee. "And there is a major change coming to the Post; a fundamental change in the way the paper operates." The Post was historically known as a left-wing newspaper, until its acquisition by Hollinger in 1989. Since then it has become a leading conservative outlet for opponents of the peace process throughout the world, thanks to its highly popular Web site. While the political future of the newspaper remains unclear, most observers are predicting the newspaper will be sold. Rumors about an impending sale were rippling through a gathering in Israel this week of 4,000 North American Jewish communal leaders. "The air at the General Assembly [of the United Jewish Communities] is thick with rumors of potential buyers," said David Landau, editor of the English edition of the Israeli daily Ha'aretz. "I think that obviously you are looking at wealthy Jews who are interested in extending their influence," one Israeli media insider said. "I don't know that any Israelis would buy it." Speculation has focused in part on Michael Steinhardt, the New York-based Jewish philanthropist with stakes in the Sun and The New Republic. Formerly a part-owner of the Forward, Steinhardt has previously displayed interest in buying the Post. Another name being mentioned is that of Ronald Lauder, the cosmetics heir who already has holdings in Israeli media. Russian investors Vladimir Gusinsky and Roman Abramovich also have been rumored to be interested. Given Hollinger's $730 million of debt, observers see no way for the company to survive without selling at least some of its assets. Numerous parties have expressed interest in The Daily Telegraph, and The Washington Post Group has been repeatedly mentioned for its interest in the Chicago Sun-Times. An Israeli media insider said the assumption is that the Post
[CTRL] Slander Its Uses
http://www.amconmag.com/11_17_03/taki.html November 17, 2003 issue Copyright 2003 The American Conservative Slander Its Uses By Taki Heres Liz Smith, the syndicated celebrity gossip columnist and the undisputed numero uno of her genre, writing about yours truly recently: The phone rang with an anonymous caller who wanted to say that Taki Theodoracopulos is a neo-Nazi and anti-Semite and that I should be ashamed for mentioning his magazine The American Conservative. The caller added, He has nothing to do with the Conservative Party. Dear, oh dear! Liz has been my friend for close to 30 years and has always reported my shenanigans with humor and a generosity of spirit, but this time she really dropped the ball. An anonymous caller? Puh-leez! Just for starters, Lizs calls are screened, and I think it would have been easier to get through to Ben Bradlee during Watergate than Liz Smith. Second of all, since when does as experienced a columnistover 50 years in the businessrepeat allegations from an anonymous caller? Would my buddy Liz have published charges of child molestation or serial murders? What then? Would the fuzz come after me? After all, an anonymous caller can say anything. That is why anonymous calls remain mostly anonymous and unprintable. What I suspect is that Liz received a call from above and is protecting the caller. Who is the vicious Mr. Big? Fools might try to reason; wise men never try. Like anonymous hate mail, one doesnt give it a seconds thoughtuntil one sees it in a friends respected syndicated column, that is. What I truly suspect happened is that we, The American Conservative, are doing something right. Our stance has been vindicated: in one year we have become the heart and soul of what conservatism is all about. Ergo the cheapest of debating tricks, writing (in this case calling) ex cathedra: I assert, therefore it is. Vladimir Nabokov called such stuff poshlost, corny trash, vulgar clichs, Philistinism in all its phases, imitations of imitations. I call it a pathetic attempt to discredit a small magazine that got it right all along, an abuse of anti-anti-Semitism, and an oft-tried wolf cry. Charges of anti-Semitism, like mud, tend to stick, and that was the purpose of the slander. What brought it on? Thats an easy one. My stance for the right of Palestinians to resist occupation, and the fact that Americas support of Ariel Sharons brutal policies has subordinated American interests and values to the vagaries of militant Zionism. Having said that, I have also insisted in print that, in its attitude toward Jews, the Muslim world today resembles Germany of the 1930sa time of state-sponsored hate and caricatures of a people based solely on their religion. Coincidentally, the Liz Smith item appeared the same time Gregg Easterbrook got into trouble over his criticism of Miramax and its parent company Disney for seeking profit by wallowing in gore. (This is handled elsewhere in the magazine.) What I did agree with in Easterbrooks writing was the following: Recent European history alone ought to cause Jewish executives to experience second thoughts about glorifying the killing of the helpless as a fun lifestyle choice. Actually I thought this passage philo-Semitic, certainly not anti-Semitic. If anything historic applies to present Israeli policies, it is the fact that people who have suffered like the Jews have should know better. But then, as Bill Buckley has written, minority exertions on foreign policy tend to have extortional effects. In other words, our friends the neocons are playing hardball with anyone who has the slightest doubt that Sharon is the Second Coming. Here is Bill again: There are inherited distinctive immunities about Israel and the Jews I agree, but depriving people of the right to equality and freedom and keeping them under occupation is hardly a democratic act. But back to anti-Semitism. I dont know many people who judge ethnic or religious groups as displaying fixed behavior. Sure, there are jokes galore, especially about Jews, mostly told by Jews, and they are very funny indeed. After all, when the joking has to stop, totalitarianism starts. Those who use anti-Semitism as a club for the apostomasis of their political opponents are the very people whom the ADL should go after. Abusing anti-Semitism is the order of the day, thanks to the neocon creed of taking no prisoners. (If any of them had served in the armed forces perhaps theyd understand that taking prisoners is as honorable a duty as resisting the enemy.) Heres Ran HaCohen, a teacher in Tel Aviv and a writer in Yedioth Achronot, on the abuse of anti-Semitism: Nowadays, an orthodox Jew can run for the most powerful office on earth. A Jew can be the mayor of Amsterdam in anti-semitic Holland, a minister in anti-semitic Britain, a leading intellectual in anti-semitic France, a president of anti-semitic Switzerland, or an industrial tycoon in anti-semitic Russia. A converted Jew is even mentioned
[CTRL] Gen. Franks Doubts Constitution Will Survive WMD Attack
-Caveat Lector- Franks should be cashiered from the service with a BCD (bad conduct discharge) for even suggesting such a thing. Of course he has plenty of company in the NWO crowd. Does this guarantee a WMD attack (say a "dirty bomb")developed by the CIA inoperation "Clear Vision.? http://www.newsmax.com/cgi-bin/printer_friendly.pl?page=http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/11/20/185048.shtml Reprinted from NewsMax.com Gen. Franks Doubts Constitution Will Survive WMD Attack John O. Edwards, NewsMax.comFriday, Nov. 21, 2003 Gen. Tommy Franks says that if the United States is hit with a weapon of mass destruction that inflicts large casualties, the Constitution will likely be discarded in favor of a military form of government. Franks, who successfully led the U.S. military operation to liberate Iraq, expressed his worries in an extensive interview he gave to the mens lifestyle magazine Cigar Aficionado. In the magazines December edition, the former commander of the militarys Central Command warned that if terrorists succeeded in using a weapon of mass destruction (WMD) against the U.S. or one of our allies, it would likely have catastrophic consequences for our cherished republican form of government. Discussing the hypothetical dangers posed to the U.S. in the wake of Sept. 11, Franks said that the worst thing that could happen is if terrorists acquire and then use a biological, chemical or nuclear weapon that inflicts heavy casualties. If that happens, Franks said, ... the Western world, the free world, loses what it cherishes most, and that is freedom and liberty weve seen for a couple of hundred years in this grand experiment that we call democracy. Franks then offered in a practical sense what he thinks would happen in the aftermath of such an attack. It means the potential of a weapon of mass destruction and a terrorist, massive, casualty-producing event somewhere in the Western world it may be in the United States of America that causes our population to question our own Constitution and to begin to militarize our country in order to avoid a repeat of another mass, casualty-producing event. Which in fact, then begins to unravel the fabric of our Constitution. Two steps, very, very important. Franks didnt speculate about how soon such an event might take place. Already, critics of the U.S. Patriot Act, rushed through Congress in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks, have argued that the law aims to curtail civil liberties and sets a dangerous precedent. But Franks scenario goes much further. He is the first high-ranking official to openly speculate that the Constitution could be scrapped in favor of a military form of government. The usually camera-shy Franks retired from U.S. Central Command, known in Pentagon lingo as CentCom, in August 2003, after serving nearly four decades in the Army. Franks earned three Purple Hearts for combat wounds and three Bronze Stars for valor. Known as a soldiers general, Franks made his mark as a top commander during the U.S.s successful Operation Desert Storm, which liberated Kuwait in 1991. He was in charge of CentCom when Osama bin Ladens al-Qaeda attacked the United States on Sept. 11. Franks said that within hours of the attacks, he was given orders to prepare to root out the Taliban in Afghanistan and to capture bin Laden. Franks offered his assessment on a number of topics to Cigar Aficionado, including: President Bush: As I look at President Bush, I think he will ultimately be judged as a man of extremely high character. A very thoughtful man, not having been appraised properly by those who would say hes not very smart. I find the contrary. I think hes very, very bright. And I suspect that hell be judged as a man who led this country through a crease in history effectively. Probably well think of him in years to come as an American hero. On the motivation for the Iraq war: Contrary to claims that top Pentagon brass opposed the invasion of Iraq, Franks said he wholeheartedly agreed with the presidents decision to invade Iraq and oust Saddam Hussein. I, for one, begin with intent. ... There is no question that Saddam Hussein had intent to do harm to the Western alliance and to the United States of America. That intent is confirmed in a great many of his speeches, his commentary, the words that have come out of the Iraqi regime over the last dozen or so years. So we have intent. If we know for sure ... that a regime has intent to do harm to this country, and if we have something beyond a reasonable doubt that this particular regime may have the wherewithal with which to execute the intent, what are our actions and orders as leaders in this country? The Pentagons deck of cards: Asked how the Pentagon decided to put its most-wanted Iraqis on a set of playing cards, Franks explained its genesis. He recalled that when his staff identified the most
[CTRL] FBI Handling of Mob Informants Condemned
-Caveat Lector- http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/7312314.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp Posted on Thu, Nov. 20, 2003 FBI Handling of Mob Informants CondemnedLOLITA C. BALDORAssociated Press WASHINGTON - While probing organized crime in New England since the 1960s, the FBI used killers as informants, shielded them from prosecution and knowingly sent innocent people to jail, House investigators said Thursday in concluding a two-year inquiry. The bureau's conduct "must be considered one of the greatest failures in the history of federal law enforcement," according to the final report from the House Government Reform Committee. "Federal law enforcement personnel tolerated and probably encouraged false testimony in a state death penalty case just to protect their criminal informants," said Rep. Dan Burton, who started the investigation when he was committee chairman. "False testimony sent four innocent men to jail. They were made scapegoats in order to shield criminals," said Burton, R-Ind. The FBI came under criticism for trying to stonewall investigators. Lawmakers complained that the bureau delayed giving them access to audio recordings and logs of conversations involving New England crime boss Raymond Patriarca that provided vital information on the 1965 murder of Edward "Teddy" Deegan. "The Justice Department made it very difficult for this committee to conduct timely and effective oversight," the report said. "The FBI must improve management of its informant programs to ensure that agents are not corrupted. The committee will examine the current FBI's management, security, and discipline to prevent similar events in the future." Lawmakers are pressing for more House hearings on the FBI's failure to cooperate. "This is an unfinished project and I think the report acknowledges that," said one committee member, Rep. John Tierney, D-Mass. "I would like to continue to investigate why the Justice Department was so recalcitrant in getting us the information. We should not tolerate that kind of behavior," he said. The FBI said in a statement that it has taken "significant steps" to improve the use of informants, who are vital to many investigations. A senior FBI official, speaking on condition of anonymity, acknowledged that the bureau was not always as forthcoming as committee members wanted. The official said some information was withheld or delayed because it related to a court case involving FBI Agent John Connolly Jr., who was convicted last year of protecting his gangster informants. The report concluded there is not enough evidence to find that former Massachusetts Senate President William Bulger used his political authority to punish those who investigated his brother, mob boss James "Whitey" Bulger. Whitey Bulger, a former FBI informant who worked with Connolly, fled in 1995 and is on the FBI's "Ten Most Wanted" list. He is being sought in connection with 21 murders. The report said there were some inconsistencies in William Bulger's testimony. His lawyer, Thomas Kiley, said the report exonerates his client, who was given immunity to testify. "For any thinking person, this should end it," said Kiley. "But there is a cadre of Bulger bashers here who have spread these street legends for years and I don't harbor any illusion they're going to stop." The report, while broadly condemning the FBI's practices, focuses on the Deegan murder and law enforcement efforts to protect informants, including Jimmy "The Bear" Flemmi and Stephen "The Rifleman" Flemmi. Four men were wrongly convicted of Deegan's murder - two died in prison and two served more than 30 years in prison - all due to what officials concluded was false testimony and the FBI's efforts to protect informants. Jimmy Flemmi died in prison while serving time for a different murder. Stephen Flemmi
