Saturday, January 14, 2006

President George W. Bush has signed executive orders giving him sole authority to impose martial law, suspend habeas corpus and ignore the Posse Comitatus Act that prohibits deployment of U.S. troops on American streets. This would give him absolute dictatorial power over the government with no checks and balances.

Bush discussed imposing martial law on American streets in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks by activating “national security initiatives” put in place by Ronald Reagan during the 1980s.These “national security initiatives," hatched in 1982 by controversial Marine Colonel Oliver North, later one of the key players in the Iran-Contra Scandal, charged the Federal Emergency Management Agency with administering executive orders that allowed suspension of the Constitution, implementation of martial law, establishment of internment camps, and the turning the government over to the Presiden

Bush used parts of the plan to send troops into the streets of New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina. In addition, FEMA hired former special forces personnel from the mercenary firm Blackwater USA to “enforce security.”

Read on. . . .

Friday, January 13, 2006

Bush Authorized Domestic Spying before 9/11

The National Security Agency advised President Bush in early 2001 that it had been eavesdropping on Americans during the course of its work monitoring suspected terrorists and foreigners believed to have ties to terrorist groups, according to a declassified document.

The NSA's vast data-mining activities began shortly after Bush was sworn in as president and the document contradicts his assertion that the 9/11 attacks prompted him to take the unprecedented step of signing a secret executive order authorizing the NSA to monitor a select number of American citizens thought to have ties to terrorist groups.

In its "Transition 2001" report, the NSA said that the ever-changing world of global communication means that "American communication and targeted adversary communication will coexist." "Make no mistake, NSA can and will perform its missions consistent with the Fourth Amendment and all applicable laws," the document says. However, it adds that "senior leadership must understand that the NSA's mission will demand a 'powerful, permanent presence' on global telecommunications networks that host both 'protected' communications of Americans and the communications of adversaries the agency wants to target."

What had long been understood to be protocol in the event that the NSA spied on average Americans was that the agency would black out the identities of those individuals or immediately destroy the information.

But according to people who worked at the NSA as encryption specialists during this time, that's not what happened. On orders from Defense Department officials and President Bush, the agency kept a running list of the names of Americans in its system and made it readily available to a number of senior officials in the Bush administration, these sources said, which in essence meant the NSA was conducting a covert domestic surveillance operation in violation of the law.

Read on . . . .

The Official Cover for Imperialistic War

John Bolton "Bull in the china shop"
Now it is obvious why he was chosen to be the U.S. "Ambassador" to the U.N.

Here is the cover under which the U.S. will invade Iran, and at the same time, stymie the EU. The EU's part in this is complex, but essentially, they are being blackmailed by the U.S.. But then, mutual colonial greed also plays a part. The following article analises the whole pretense very well. Pay attention to all of it, for it is gives good insight of how the present day U.S. foreign policy works when it decides on war; very much similar to the run-up of the Iraq invasion.

US, EU set to refer Iran to the UN Security Council

The US and European Union (EU) have set course for a full-scale confrontation with Iran, following steps by Tehran on Tuesday to restart its uranium enrichment facilities. The foreign ministers of the EU-3—Britain, France and Germany—met yesterday in Berlin and called for an emergency meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to discuss referring Iran to the UN Security Council for possible punitive sanctions.

The Bush administration, which has been clamouring for such action for more than two years, immediately backed the decision. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice yesterday condemned Iran’s “provocative actions” and its “dangerous defiance of the entire international community”. She declared last week that the US had the votes on the 35-member IAEA governing board to ensure the issue was taken to the UN Security Council.

The entire process bears a close resemblance to the lead up to the US-led invasion of Iraq. Just as non-existent “weapons of mass destruction” were the pretext for an illegal war on Iraq so the Bush administration is exploiting Iran’s alleged nuclear weapons program to further its economic and strategic domination in the resource-rich Middle East and Central Asia. The chief target is not so much Iran but the United States’ rivals in Europe and Asia, which over the last decade or so have established close economic relations with Tehran.

But the sanctions will have a serious impact on EU countries, which are heavily dependent on Iran for oil and have expanding trade links with Tehran.

Read on . . . .

Wednesday, January 11, 2006

Dollar Imperialism -


Of all I've read, this essay explains and ties together all that has gone on in the last decades, and before, better than any other single article I've seen. We're heading for war with Iran very quickly now; Livergood gives not only the real reasons, but how we got to this point. And more.

An imperialistic regime extends its power and dominion over other nations through military, economic, and cultural means. This involves the military acquisition of territory, gaining control over the political and economic life of subject groups, and imposing its money system on conquered nations. The Assyrian, Egyptian, Chinese, Roman, and British Empires all established a single currency standard for the regions over which they ruled. The British forced their colonies and most other nations of the world to use the British pound sterling as the international monetary standard during its world rule in the eighteenth, nineteenth and early twentieth century.

When America emerged from the second world war as the most powerful nation in the world, both economically and militarily, the demonic cabal that had seized political, economic, and social control of the United States in the first decades of the twentieth century was able to impose the American dollar on the world as the standard currency. In 1944, even before the war was over, the Western nations met at Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, to agree on the American dollar as the world currency. Bretton Woods established a dollar standard to replace the gold standard. The value of the dollar was fixed to gold at $35 to the ounce, and the world’s currencies were fixed to the dollar.

Following World War II, the international cabal wanted to make sure its dollar would be the international currency standard, so it created, among other processes, the Marshall Plan, named after Truman's secretary of state, George Marshall. The plan loaned American dollars to all the nations of Europe to "assist in the return of normal economic health in the world."

Read on, this is excellent!

Tuesday, January 10, 2006

Jerusalem to be annexed by Israel.

Which insures continued strife....

Israeli media rallies behind Sharon’s Kadima party.

Israel’s media and political establishment has gone into overdrive in an effort to ensure that Ariel Sharon’s party Kadima survives its founder and forms the next government on March 28.

Meanwhile, every moment has been used to shore up Israel’s stability as the bourgeoisie’s key representative inevitably leaves the stage.

The first task for the ruling elite is to preclude the emergence of any domestic opposition to the annexation of much of the West Bank and the whole of Jerusalem that Sharon initiated behind the smokescreen of his unilateral withdrawal from Gaza. This would leave Israel free to impose its agenda on the Palestinians, under conditions where there is rising militancy as a result of the depredations imposed by military occupation and economic encirclement.

Read on . . . .

US learns from Dutch flood dykes

Click on photo to enlarge
It is not a normal part of American mentality to seek advice, knowledge or help from other countries (or at least admit that), so this is a bit of news. And then this article comes from the UK news source.

In the aftermath of Katrina, the Dutch sent people to help with pumping out the flood waters with their much higher capacity pumps, as well as help provide immediate aid per ship, which was not readily accepted. This received minimum news coverage.

While the Netherlands is the leading country in water management (not just flood control), there is one element I suspect is missing here on the part of the U.S. federal government: The wish to protect its own people and quality of life. The delegation seems to me to be aimed primarily at economics/business, which is also a part of water management. But the will to do what is best for its own people is one thing I see missing in this, and so many other things.

US learns from Dutch flood dykes

A US delegation is in the Netherlands to study the flood control systems protecting a country that lies further below sea level than New Orleans.

The 50-member delegation includes the Governor of Louisiana, Kathleen Blanco, US senators and business leaders.

In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, the US is looking to learn from the experience of the Netherlands. Water management experts will be showing the US visitors its massive system of dams and sea walls.

In the flood of 1953, 2,000 people died in the Netherlands.

Complex measures The Delta Project, with twin gates the size of the Eiffel Tower, can seal the mouth of Rotterdam Harbour in case of a sea surge.

But the government admits, that no matter what you do to prepare, something can always go wrong. "You can never say a 100%," says Annelie Kohl, a spokesperson for the water ministry. "That doesn't exist anywhere in the world - that would be unwise to say," she says. "But obviously it's a very important part for our defence here in the Netherlands. "As you know, most of our country is below sea level, so it's of the utmost importance for us to have safe dykes and other measures to protect us."

The US delegates will be looking at how the Dutch now designate land for rivers to flood when the water level rises, instead of building dykes and levees. But to be sure, they have just completed an entire network of flood defences here to protect against any storm - except one so severe it can happen only once in 10,000 years.


Monday, January 09, 2006

Unborn babies possibly harmed by GM foods

GM: New study shows unborn babies could be harmed

Mortality rate for new-born rats six times higher when mother was fed on a diet of modified soya

Women who eat GM foods while pregnant risk endangering their unborn babies, startling new research suggests. The study - carried out by a leading scientist at the Russian Academy of Sciences - found that more than half of the offspring of rats fed on modified soya died in the first three weeks of life, six times as many as those born to mothers with normal diets.

Six times as many were also severely underweight. The research - which is being prepared for publication - is just one of a clutch of recent studies that are reviving fears that GM food damages human health.

Italian research has found that modified soya affected the liver and pancreas of mice. Australia had to abandon a decade-long attempt to develop modified peas when an official study found they caused lung damage.

Read on . . . .

Sunday, January 08, 2006

Bolivia's Home-Grown President

Miss Bolivia, Susan Barrientos: Now that I have your attention, you can read the rest of this :D

Evo Morales, below left.

Evo Morales may have won at the polls, but Bolivia is still far from a victory.

On its face, the election of Evo Morales to the presidency of Bolivia would seem like an enormous victory for the left -- another domino in the line of Latin American nations turning away from Washington Consensus-style economics to forge a path of its own. But the question remains whether the first indigenous president in Bolivia's history will be allowed -- by the Bolivian Congress or by the larger international financial and legal system -- to live up to his promises and fulfill the enormous expectations of his supporters. If not, Bolivia could face an even more unstable future.

The symbolic value of a Morales victory cannot be overstated in a country where symbols represent the passions of a people mobilized to change what they see as 500 years of state oppression.

But will Evo Morales be able to live up to his promises?

Read on about this interesting country and its new native president. . . .

Read Miss Bolivia's Bios here....

Iraq to cost U.S. more than $2 trillion

Iraq to cost U.S. more than $2 trillion, says report

More pressure on the Bush administration over its handling of the war Washington: The real cost to America of the Iraq war is likely to be between $1 trillion and $2 trillion, up to 10 times more than previously thought, according to a report written by a Nobel prize-winning economist and a Harvard budget expert.

The study, which expands on traditional estimates by including such costs as lifetime disability and healthcare for troops injured in the conflict as well as the impact on the American economy, concludes that the U.S. Government is continuing to grossly underestimate the cost of the war.

The paper on the real cost of the war, written by Joseph Stiglitz, Columbia University professor who won the Nobel Prize for economics in 2001, and Linda Bilmes, a Harvard budget expert, is likely to add to the pressure on the Bush administration over its handling of the war.

It also follows the revelation this week that the White House has scaled back its ambitions to rebuild Iraq and does not intend to seek new funds for reconstruction.

Read on. . . .