Saturday, July 28, 2007

O’ Liar cuts the mic of one of his OWN analysts!

Jane Hall gets just a tad too truthful about hate speech on Billo’s OWN website, so he CUTS HER MIC!

by Larry Simons
July 28, 2007

O’ Liar should have stopped this ridiculous crusade he has against the DailyKos while he was ahead. Ok….he was never ahead, I take that back. Ok, he should have stopped before his own guests and news analysts completely embarrassed him on the air and had to be subjected to become the newest members of the “cut the mic” club. This list grows each year as more and more guests have come on O’ Liar’s show and have stood up to the Lord of Loofahs and his endless stream of lies and spin.

On Tuesday night’s installment of The No Fact Zone, Billo had Hillary Clinton’s Communications director Howard Wolfson on the show and they were discussing Wolfson’s support for the DailyKos. Here’s part of the exchange:

O’REILLY: Every respectable blog in the country does not permit this hatred…..

WOLFSON: Bill, even your website has things on it that you would find objectionable.

O’REILLY: That’s bull. Look, we know what you’re going to say because the Kos planted someone in there. But when we see objectionable things, we take it off immediately. They traffic in it.

Here’s the clip:


(click above for picture)

Note above that this blogger has posted over 1,000 posts on O’ Liar’s site. This means simply that the blogger isn’t new, nor did they come on O’ Liar’s site just to pose as a member or hijack the blog thread (as O’ Liar claimed on a previous show) It’s a regular member, and Billo is SIZZED again!

On Wednesday’s No Fact Zone, O’ Liar has his two favorite goons on, Bernard Goldberg and Jane Hall. Jane Hall is usually pretty soft with taking a stand against the Big Giant Head, but she did well this time, pointing out Billo’s hypocrisy of smearing the DailyKos, but not having comments removed from HIS OWN WEBSITE that were hateful.

Billo called her a liar and did what he does best, tries to talk over her so she can’t be heard and then signals (off camera) to have her mic cut while the screen shows shots of Billo’s website---but NOT showing the comment threads that I have posted below. Hmmm, I wonder why this wasn’t shown! Hmmmmmmmmm. Good job Jane---it’s about time you made Loofahboy panic and run to his screen graphics to block out him signaling to his crew to get Jane’s mic cut. He very well couldn’t do this in the open, not to a paid news contributor!

(click for pictures above)


Let’s watch!:



Threatening the life of a Presidential Candidate…yeah Billo, you’re right---I guess that’s not hateful!

Friday, July 27, 2007

New Evidence Clearly Indicates Pat Tillman Was Executed

Army medical examiners concluded Tillman was shot three times in the head from just 10 yards away, no evidence of "friendly fire" damage at scene, Army attorneys congratulated each other on cover-up, Wesley Clark concludes "orders came from the very top" to murder pro-football star because he was about to become an anti-war political icon

Paul Joseph Watson
PrisonPlanet
July 27, 2007

Astounding new details surrounding the death of Pat Tillman clearly indicate that top brass decided to execute the former pro football star in cold blood to prevent him from returning home and becoming an anti-war icon.

These same criminals then engaged in a sophisticated conspiracy to create a phony "friendly fire" cover story.

Shocking new facts emerged about the case last night but were bizarrely underplayed by the Associated Press under nondescript headlines like 'New Details on Tillman's Death' - a complete disservice to the horrific implications that the new evidence carries.

Army medical examiners were suspicious about the close proximity of the three bullet holes in Pat Tillman's forehead and tried without success to get authorities to investigate whether the former NFL player's death amounted to a crime, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press.

"The medical evidence did not match up with the, with the scenario as described," a doctor who examined Tillman's body after he was killed on the battlefield in Afghanistan in 2004 told investigators.

The doctors - whose names were blacked out - said that the bullet holes were so close together that it appeared the Army Ranger was cut down by an M-16 fired from a mere 10 yards or so away.

The report also states that "No evidence at all of enemy fire was found at the scene - no one was hit by enemy fire, nor was any government equipment struck."

The article also reveals that "Army attorneys sent each other congratulatory e-mails for keeping criminal investigators at bay as the Army conducted an internal friendly-fire investigation that resulted in administrative, or non-criminal, punishments."

So there was no evidence whatsoever of friendly fire, but the ballistics data clearly indicated that the three head shots had been fired from just 10 yards away and then the Army tried to concoct a hoax friendly fire story and sent gloating back-slapping e mails congratulating each other on their success while preventing the doctors from exploring the possibility of murder. How can any sane and rational individual weigh this evidence and not come to the conclusion that Tillman was deliberately gunned down in cold blood?

The evidence points directly to it and the motivation is clear - Tillman abandoned a lucrative career in pro-football immediately after 9/11 because he felt a rampaging patriotic urge to defend his country, and became a poster child for the war on terror as a result. But when he discovered that the invasion of Iraq was based on a mountain of lies and deceit and had nothing to do with defending America, he became infuriated and was ready to return home to become an anti-war hero.

As far back as March 2003, immediately after the invasion, Tillman famously told his comrade Spc. Russell Baer, "You know, this war is so fucking illegal," and urged his entire platoon to vote against Bush in the 2004 election. Far from the gung-ho gruff stereotype attributed to him, Tillman was actually a fiercely intellectual man with the courage of his convictions firmly in place.

Tillman had even begun to arrange meetings with anti-war icons like Noam Chomsky upon his return to America before his death cut short any aspirations of becoming a focal point for anti-war sentiment.

According to Daily Kos, Wesley Clark appeared on Keith Olbermann's Countdown last night and stated that "the orders came from the very top" to murder Tillman as he was a political symbol and his opposition to the war in Iraq would have rallied the population around supporting immediate withdrawal.

Here's the clip:



The notion that the U.S. government gave orders for Army top brass to execute Pat Tillman in cold blood is the most damaging indictment of the Iraq war since it began, trumping the lies about weapons of mass destruction tenfold, but if the establishment media continue to soft-peddle and steam-valve one of the biggest stories of the century its impact will be completely diluted.

It is up to us to make this story go viral because the implications are so dire that they could act as the final death knell for the blood-soaked and illegal occupation of Iraq and become the clarion call to bring our troops home.

Thursday, July 26, 2007

Political Prisoner: Loose Change Producer Korey Rowe Arrested

Iraq, Afghanistan veteran handed over to military officials by police under charges of "deserting the Army"

Alex Jones & Paul Joseph Watson
PrisonPlanet
July 25, 2007

Loose Change producer and Iraq and Afghanistan veteran Korey Rowe has been arrested and handed over to military officials without bail for allegedly "deserting the Army".

According to a report in the New York Daily Star, Rowe was arrested on Monday night at a county Route 47 residence in Oneonta.

Here is the column by staff writer Jake Palmateer:

An Oneonta man who helped produce a 9/11 conspiracy documentary that became an Internet hit was arrested Monday for allegedly deserting the Army. Korey Rowe, 24, a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq, was picked up by deputies at about 10:45 p.m. Monday, Otsego County Sheriff Richard Devlin Jr. said.

Rowe, along with Dylan Avery and Jason Bermas, are members of Louder Than Words, a production company that is working on a third edition of the movie "Loose Change," which contends the U.S. government was involved in the 9/11 terrorist attacks. That edition is intended to be a theatrical release.

Rowe and the other members of Louder Than Words have appeared on radio shows including The Alex Jones Show and have been mentioned in Time magazine. Vanity Fair magazine published a feature story on the group last August. Since 2002, Rowe was interviewed by The Daily Star several times about "Loose Change" and his experiences in the military.

"We developed information that he was at a county Route 47 residence in Oneonta last night," Devlin said Tuesday.
Rowe was arrested on a "military warrant" that Devlin said was brought to the attention of deputies by the Oneonta Police Department, who received information from a source outside of that department. Rowe was living at the Route 47 home, Devlin said.

City police officials who were able to comment on the case were unavailable Tuesday night. After deputies received the information from Oneonta police, they reached out to the Army, and officials from Fort Knox faxed a copy of the warrant, deputies said. Rowe previously told The Daily Star he enlisted in August 2001. He left the Army in June 2005, according to the Louder Than Words website. He is being held without bail in the Otsego County jail and is waiting to be picked up by U.S. Army officials, Devlin said.

The Associated Press reported last month that deserters are rarely court-martialed by the Army. Although 3,301 soldiers deserted in the 2006 fiscal year, there were just 174 troops court-martialed. The AP report said some deserters are returned to their units, while others are discharged in non-criminal proceedings.

Desertion rates have been rising since 2004, but the Army does little to seek out deserters and instead relies on a database that can be cross-checked by local law-enforcement agencies during encounters such as traffic stops, the report states.

The Department of Defense public-affairs office did not immediately return a call for comment Tuesday.
A woman who answered Rowe’s cell phone Tuesday and identified herself only as Kristy said Rowe was "taken" from a house Monday night.

The Louder Than Words website lists a Kristy Kissner as an administrative assistant for the group. "All we know is that he has been arrested," the woman said. "We know nothing. We just hope that whatever happened comes out."
Rowe’s parents did not immediately return a message left Tuesday. In media interviews, Rowe has criticized the Iraq war and the Bush administration.

Desertion is defined under Article 85 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice as being when a soldier leaves his or her unit or place of duty with the intent to remain away from there permanently or quits his or her unit with the intent to avoid hazardous duty. It is considered a felony.

Arrests and court martials for deserters are incredibly rare and this appears to be an obvious case of political persecution as the Loose Change crew prepare the cinematic release of the final version of their popular documentary.

According to MSNBC, "Despite a rise in desertions from the Army as the Iraq war drags on into a fifth year, the U.S. military does almost nothing to find those who flee and rarely prosecutes those it gets its hands on."

The Army court-martialed just 5% of deserters last year, with that number dropping to just 1 per cent or less for the Navy and the Marines.

Rowe enlisted in the Army in August 2001 and left in June 2005. He has been out of the Army for over two years. He was previously arrested under similar circumstances but was immediately released.

Alex Jones interviewed Rowe at a conference in Chicago last year, during which he exposed how CNN and the military would stage photo-ops to make it appear as if Al-Qaeda members were being killed in Afghanistan, along with a host of other cover-ups and atrocities.

This will inevitably backfire on the authorities, but only if we put intense pressure on them to release Korey.

Neo-Cons Cheer Arrest Of Korey Rowe

Paul Joseph Watson
PrisonPlanet
July 25, 2007

Neo-Con website Newsbusters and Michele "put every Muslim in a concentration camp" Malkin's Hot Air are both lauding the arrest of Loose Change producer Korey Rowe, advocating the internment of American citizens for their political opinions.

Hot Air laments the fact that Rowe wasn't apprehended earlier at his previous public appearances while Newsbusters columnist Noel Sheppard goes further - identifying Rowe's 9/11 activism as a legitimate reason for his arrest on behalf the Army.

Under this logic, Michele Malkin herself should have been incarcerated for questioning the official story of 9/11 in a column she wrote in March 2002.

Frothing comments on the Digg page of our earlier article also triumph the fact that the military are now kidnapping American citizens as political prisoners.

Commentary
by Larry Simons

Today must have been a glorious day for the imbeciles of America (those who still accept the government’s fairy tale version of the events of 9/11). But also, it was a time of cheer for Neo-con buffoons such as Michelle “lips” Malkin who on both of her websites cheer the arrest of Loose Change producer Korey Rowe. I’m sure in the pea brains of the ‘official’ conspiracy theorists, they are finding joy linking Rowe’s arrest with his version of 9/11 being incorrect. “He gets arrested for “desertion” so he must be wrong about 9/11” is what I’m sure the general sentiment is in Sheepville.

My position about this is simply this: I don’t care if he did it or not. In fact, if he did, it solidifies his opposition to Bush and his criminal policies….in other words, it makes even MORE sense. I’m waiting until more facts develop about this, but a small part of me feels that he didn’t desert at all. If he had, why did they wait so long to arrest him since he has been in the public eye since the popularity of “Loose Change” on the internet? Simply put…he was EASY TO FIND. I was in NYC on September 11, 2006 and I saw him there, and I wasn’t even looking for him!

This obviously boils down to 2 possible things: He didn’t desert at all, and Rowe’s arrest is a complete and utter fabrication to serve as one big political attack to damage the credibility of Loose Change and the 9/11 Truth Movement, or he did desert and they are going after Rowe solely for his political views. It’s a fact that the Army has only court-martialed 5% of all deserters in 2006, so are we to believe that Rowe just happens to be included in this small percentage when he has been in the public spotlight for the past 2 years, and there have been countless opportunities for law enforcement to make an arrest?

Whether he deserted or not, the timing of this arrest is no accident. The release of ‘Loose Change: Final Cut’ is only 1-2 months away. Had this arrest been made last year, or 6 months ago, it wouldn’t have had the same impact on the release of this film since its release would have been as far as 18 months away.

This is America. Timing is everything. Deserter or not, this act by the powers-that-be to make Rowe a political prisoner and to assassinate reputations, so when the film is released, people (misled by the media) will jeer and yell “deserter!” in an attempt to discredit the film without realizing or even caring that Rowe’s alleged desertion falls in line with his dissent of the war and political views.

Now, we come to the hypocrisy of the buffoons. Noel Sheppard of Newsbusters, in an attempt to smear Rowe and the 9/11 truthers, without realizing it, actually defends our case. Here is an excerpt from his hit piece on Rowe today:

“No mention (by Rowe) of deserting the military in a lengthy interview with Smith magazine, either, even though several questions involved his Army service. Of course, that's not something you advertise. However, given the publicity of his film, one has to wonder why he wasn't picked up sooner? On the other hand, according to the Star, the military doesn't focus a lot of attention on finding deserters. Regardless, it seems given Rowe's activism concerning 9/11 being an inside job, maybe the Army should have done more to apprehend him sooner.”

Sheppard says “No mention of deserting the military in a lengthy interview with Smith magazine, either, even though several questions involved his Army service. Of course, that’s not something you advertise.” Here are the questions that Smith magazine asked regarding Rowe’s Army service:

“What made you want to join the military?”
“Did you want to go to war?”
“What were you doing in Afghanistan?”
“And in Iraq?”
“How did that experience change you?”
“When you got back from Iraq did you know you wanted to go work on the film?”
“When you came back was there anything that really bothered you about the American public?”

This was all that was asked about Rowe's Army service. Not ONE of those questions would prompt ANYONE to say, “Oh yeah, I deserted” But when you read Sheppards column, he leaves out these questions, doesn’t he? Then he quotes The Star reporting that “the military doesn’t focus a lot of attention on finding deserters.” Excellent point Noel. They don’t spend a lot of time going after deserters. And why would that be Noel? Because maybe they’re not out in the public eye? Maybe they’re not dissenting the war? Maybe they’re not making films that tell the truth about 9-11? Maybe they’re not doing interviews for magazines? Oh wait! That’s what Korey Rowe did! So, did the Army go after Rowe for deserting or for his political activism? Since he’s been out for TWO years, I think we have our answer. If it bothered the Army that he deserted, where were they for two years? If it didn’t bother them in 2005 and in 2006, why does it now?

It all boils down to the fact that there’s only two ways you can stand on this: Either you feel that Rowe was busted for his political views (since the Army did not act for two years knowing Rowe’s whereabouts), or that you feel he was busted for desertion and the Army just NOW found out about it. Either way, it’s bogus. Either way, the truth of 9-11 does not change because someone may or may not have deserted from the Army.

Now, onto “lips” Malkin. I’m going to make this one quick since this is a pretty damned easy expose of the FIXED News Neo-con hypocrite. On both of Malkin’s websites, www.michellemalkin.com and www.hotair.com , “lips” takes delight in the Korey Rowe arrest story. No shock there. She’s taken the Neo-con position on the alternate story of 9-11 for some time…in fact, since at least mid to late 2002, because in March of 2002, she did an article DOUBTING the official story of 9-11! Here is that entire article:

“THE six-month anniversary of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks is upon us. Here are a half-dozen unsolved mysteries still on my mind:

What really happened on United Airlines Flight 93? As the Philadelphia Daily News reported back in November, many folks in Shanksville, Pa., where the hijacked Boeing 757 crashed, believe the plane was shot down.
Eyewitnesses reported seeing a small, unmarked jet flying overhead immediately after impact; others are convinced they heard the piercing sound of a missile. A federal flight controller told The Telegraph of Nashua, N.H., that an F-16 had indeed been in "hot pursuit" of Flight 93 until it hit the ground. One of the 911calls from a passenger on the flight indicated that there was an explosion aboard the plane. The FBI immediately confiscated the tape.

The eight-mile-wide debris field seems to bolster claims of an on-board explosion. So did the discovery of a one-ton chunk of the plane's engine far from the rest of the crash site - which some say points to evidence that a heat-seeking missile targeted the flight. Then there's the eight-minute gap from the time all cell phone calls from the plane ceased and the time it crashed.

Although both the cockpit voice recorder and flight data recorder were recovered, not a single scrap about what was on the black boxes has been officially released. This despite the government's otherwise routine release of such information. (Recall that after American Airlines Flight 587 crashed in New York last November, the feds released detailed information from one of the black boxes within less than two days.) The feds insist on keeping all the Flight 11 data secret because disclosing such information might "interfere with enforcement proceedings." Against whom? All the hijack culprits are dead.

What really happened on American Airlines Flight 11? Did one of the hijackers have a gun on board? Was it planted before the flight took off, or was it smuggled on? Either way, shouldn't someone be held accountable if such an egregious security breach did in fact take place? Investigative reporter Paul Sperry, formerly of Investor's Business Daily and now with Worldnetdaily.com, scooped the mainstream press by exposing a high-level, internal report from the Federal Aviation Administration. It detailed the alleged shooting of Flight 11 passenger Daniel Lewin by hijacker Satam Al Suqami.

According to the document, which was later obtained by the Washington Post, USA Today, and others, an onboard flight attendant reported in a phone call that "one bullet was reported to have been fired" during the flight, killing Lewin before the plane crashed into the north tower of the World Trade Center. FAA officials dismissed the leaked memo as a draft and claimed that the very specific report of gunfire - including the names of the victim, shooter, and their precise seat numbers -- was an editing error.

Just a typo, huh?

Who murdered Katherine Smith, and why? Smith was the Tennessee state license examiner who had been implicated last month in a phony ID scam involving a group of shady Middle Eastern men from New York City. Investigators say there are "connections" between the ring and the Sept. 11 terrorists; one of them had a repair pass in his possession that gave him access to the lower levels of the World Trade Center basement. It was dated Sept. 5.

A day before Smith was to appear in court over the matter, she died in a bizarre and fiery crash inside a car registered to one of her Middle Eastern co-defendants. Smith was burned beyond recognition; her arms and legs disintegrated in the flames. Yet, her car was traveling barely over 20 mph when it hit a utility pole and damage to the vehicle was minimal. This week, the Tennessee Highway Patrol concluded definitively that her "death was not the result of the crash itself. Her death was by other means." Is this the vengeful work of al Qaeda killers still on the loose?

Finally: Why does Norm Mineta still have a job? Who's responsible for the anthrax attacks? And the most nagging unresolved question of all: So where the he-l is Osama bin Laden, anyway?”


Hmmmm, interesting huh? Now, “lips” advocates the internment of any American for their political opinions. Looks like Malkin received the same brainwashing O’ Reilly received when he joined FIXED News. Malkin is not the only one at FIXED News that has done an about face on conspiracies. O’ Reilly did a conspiracy piece on JFK assassination in 1991 when he was with Inside Edition where his view is clear in the piece that he does not think Oswald acted alone, now he calls conspiracy people “kooks”. Here’s that clip:



Now, here’s O’ Reilly on The Factor talking to Vincent Bugloisi after his brainwashing.



It seems like when you join FIXED News…you lose a lot of things, including your integrity and your memory. They’re all drinking the same water over there at FIXED News. The question I have is: When can we take Malkin to the internment camps?


UPDATE: Defiant Korey Rowe: "I'm Not Going Anywhere"
Loose Change producer released, heads to Fort Campbell to clear his name

Paul Joseph Watson
PrisonPlanet
July 26, 2007

A defiant Korey Rowe promised his detractors "I'm not going anywhere" in a brief You Tube video last night after he was released from Fort Drum and headed to Fort Campbell to clear his name for good.

Rowe, an Iraq and Afghanistan combat veteran, is one of the producers of Loose Change, a wildly popular documentary that alleges U.S. government involvement in the 9/11 attack. He was arrested on Monday night on charges of desertion even though he had been out of the Army for two years and had made numerous public appearances since at which authorities could have apprehended him.

Rowe's case is an obvious example of political persecution, his movements over the last two years have largely been public knowledge and the arrest was obviously timed to coincide with the upcoming cinematic release of Loose Change Final Cut, and intended as a chilling effect for the rest of the 9/11 truth community.

As we highlighted yesterday, the Army court-martialed just 5% of deserters last year, with that number dropping to just 1 per cent or less for the Navy and the Marines. Rowe had satisfactorily completed his tour of duty and yet was grabbed by police and handed over to military officials on the basis of a tip-off the authorities received.

9/11 truth debunkers like Michelle "put every Muslim in a concentration camp" Malkin and Neo-Con blowhards Newsbusters applauded the arrest of American citizens for their political viewpoints yesterday, lamenting the fact that Rowe had not been kidnapped sooner as a result of his activism.

This whole episode has been a public relations disaster for the authorities and the debunkers, and it will only serve in bringing more attention to the theatre debut of the Loose Change documentary, which is tentatively scheduled to be released on the weekend preceding September 11, 2007.

And as Korey Rowe defiantly stated, no matter what the Neo-Con press whores say about us and no matter what the authorities do to try and intimidate us - the 9/11 truth movement is here to stay and we are not going anywhere.

SECOND UPDATE: Rowe Arrested Despite Honorable Discharge Papers
Loose Change producer reveals startling new details to Prison Planet, Fox News, including how arresting officers cut his phone lines, came out of the woods - Fort Drum officials immediately released Rowe following barrage of phone calls


Paul Joseph Watson
PrisonPlanet
July 26, 2007

Korey Rowe, the Afghanistan and Iraq combat veteran and producer of Loose Change, who was arrested on Monday under charges of desertion, presented his honorable discharge papers to the arresting officers and yet was grabbed after a sophisticated operation where police staked out his house from the woods and cut his phone lines.

Rowe was interviewed about the events today for a Fox News report.

Korey Rowe, 24, who served with the 101st Airborne in Afghanistan and Iraq, told FOXNews.com that he was honorably discharged from the military 18 months ago — which he said he explained to sheriffs when they pounded on his door late Monday night.

“When they came to my house, I showed them my paperwork,” Rowe said. “The cops said, 'You’re still in the system.'”

Rowe was turned over to officials at Fort Drum — the closest military base — who then booked him on a flight to Fort Campbell, Ky., where his unit is based, to try to straighten out why the military issued a warrant for his arrest.

“A warrant for my arrest came down and showed up on the sheriff’s desk,” Rowe said. “Where it came from and why it showed up all of a sudden is a mystery to me.”

Rowe said he was sitting in his living room watching the show “Cops” and drinking a beer Monday night when police banged on the door.

“I thought it was the TV,” he said. “There was f-----g mad cops out there. I thought, here we go.”

There were at least five sheriffs on hand for his arrest, Rowe said. They told him he had an active-duty warrant from the military.

“They pulled a whole operation. They cut my phone lines. They came from the woods. It was crazy — it was ridiculous,” he said.

Rowe shared further details with us about the sequence of events than is revealed in the Fox News article.

According to Rowe, Army officials at Fort Drum, where Rowe was held for a day and a half, seemed uninterested in the case until their phone lines were incinerated by a barrage of calls from listeners who responded to our call to action yesterday morning.

It was at that point that officials checked into Rowe's record and immediately confirmed that he had received an honorable discharge and told Rowe he was free to leave, and even offered to pay his way to get back to New York. They were baffled as to why a warrant would be out for his arrest when he had clearly been given permission to leave the Army in 2005.

It was Korey Rowe's personal decision to travel on to Fort Campbell Kentucky in an attempt to ensure his name was completely expunged from the system and that such events would not repeat for a third time, with Rowe having been arrested once before under a similar pretext.

Rowe was able to board an airplane without being apprehended, as he had been many times before the incident, because there has never been a warrant against his name in the database.

Though Korey Rowe puts the arrest down to a probable "administrative error", many in the 9/11 truth movement will be wondering if this was part of a pre-emptive strategy to discredit the upcoming cinematic release of Loose Change Final Cut.

The documentary is set to include explosive new interviews that will shake the political spectrum to the core.

The nature of the arrest certainly has Army intelligence planning written all over it and we will be certain to share more details upon Korey Rowe's return from Kentucky, which is expected to be in around a week's time.

Monday, July 23, 2007

Bush's Martial Law Plan Is So Shocking, Even Congress Can't See it

Executive über alles as member of Homeland Security Committee barred from viewing post-terror attack provisions

Paul Joseph Watson
PrisonPlanet
July 23, 2007

President Bush's post-terror attack martial law plan is so shocking that even sitting members of Congress and Homeland Security officials are barred from viewing it, another example of executive über alles and a chilling portent of what is to come as constant reminders of the inevitability of terror attacks reverberate.

Congressman Peter DeFazio (D - OR) was asked by his constituents to see what was contained within the classified portion of the White House's plan for operating the government after a terrorist attack.

Since DeFazio also sits on the Homeland Security Committee and has clearance to view classified material, the request would have appeared to be routine, but the Congressman was unceremoniously denied all access to view the documents, and the White House wouldn't even give an excuse as to why he was barred.

"I just can't believe they're going to deny a member of Congress the right of reviewing how they plan to conduct the government of the United States after a significant terrorist attack," DeFazio told the Oregonian on Friday.

"We're talking about the continuity of the government of the United States of America," DeFazio says. "I would think that would be relevant to any member of Congress, let alone a member of the Homeland Security Committee."

"Maybe the people who think there's a conspiracy out there are right," DeFazio concluded.

The article also quotes Norm Ornstein, a legal scholar who studies government continuity at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, who told the paper he "cannot think of one good reason" to deny access to a member of Congress who serves on the Homeland Security Committee.

"I find it inexplicable and probably reflective of the usual, knee-jerk overextension of executive power that we see from this White House," Ornstein said.

The only plausible reason DeFazio was barred access to the documents is that the plans for a post-terror attack continuity of government scenario are so abhorrent that to reveal their true nature would cause a public outcry and lead to a major repeal of what is contained in the documents.

What we already about Bush's recent spate of executive orders, and in particular PDD 51, is bad enough - the provisions outline preparations for the implementation of open martial law in the event of a declared national emergency.

New legislation signed on May 9, 2007, declares that in the event of a "catastrophic event", the President can take total control over the government and the country, bypassing all other levels of government at the state, federal, local, territorial and tribal levels, and thus ensuring total unprecedented dictatorial power.

It is important to understand that, although these powers have been on the books for previous presidents, Bush is the first to openly brag of the fact that he will utilize them and officially become the supreme emperor of the United States in the aftermath of a catastrophe that the government itself has said will happen on innumerable occasions.

According to columnist and author Jerome Corsi, the power grab assures that "The president can declare to the office of the presidency powers usually assumed by dictators to direct any and all government and business activities until the emergency is declared over."

Also in May, it was reported that a high-level group of government and military officials has been quietly preparing an emergency survival program named "The Day After," which would effectively end civil liberties and implement a system of martial law in the event of a catastrophic attack on a U.S. city.

Last year we also exposed the existence of a nationwide FEMA program which is training Pastors and other religious representatives to become secret police enforcers who teach their congregations to "obey the government" in preparation for a declaration of martial law, property and firearm seizures, and forced relocation.

The documents that Congressman DeFazio was blocked from seeing likely interlock with both these programs and detail the overarching agenda to effectively nullify what's left of the U.S. Constitution and firmly ensconce George W. Bush as a supreme dictator.

Only by putting enough pressure on the media and in turn the White House to be transparent about what the secret martial law provisions are can we lead an effort to repeal them before the next terror attack, whether real or manufactured, takes place.

Comment:
The question is…….are you ready for a revolution?

Giuliani has connection with priest accused of child molestation

From Foley, to Billo, to Giuliani, it seems GOP should now stand for "Gang of Pedophiles"!

by Shaun Sutner
Telegram & Gazette
July 22, 2007

Republican presidential candidate Rudolph W. Giuliani has close ties to a Catholic priest accused of sexually molesting boys and who also was the lawyer for a now-closed Whitinsville counseling house for troubled priests that has been described as the center of a pedophile sex ring.

Monsignor Alan J. Placa, who works for Mr. Giuliani’s consulting firm, Giuliani Partners, was legal adviser in the 1980s to the House of Affirmation, where priests accused of sexual abuse were sent for psychotherapy and other counseling services. The center closed in 1987 amid a financial scandal.

Monsignor Placa, who while an active priest arranged the annulment of Mr. Giuliani’s first marriage, baptized his two children and officiated at the funeral of his mother, is a childhood friend of Mr. Giuliani and they both attended Manhattanville College.

He was stripped of his duties as a priest, but not defrocked, after Newsday, a Long Island newspaper, published a story in 2002 about young men who alleged that Monsignor Placa abused them in the 1970s. He has been on administrative leave since and has worked for Mr. Giuliani for the past five years.

Catholic activists who are fighting the church over the clergy sex abuse issue say Mr. Giuliani’s association with the monsignor raises serious questions about the former New York mayor’s candidacy.

“The White House should not be inhabited by a man whose closest friend is accused of being an abuser of young men,” said Ann Barrett Doyle, co-director of BishopAccountability.org in Massachusetts. “Giuliani has a responsibility to account for his friendship with Alan Placa and I think he should speak with Alan Placa’s accusers and see how credible they are.

“For Giuliani to turn a blind eye to these credible allegations raises questions about his judgment,” she said.

Jeffrey Barker, a spokesman for Mr. Giuliani’s campaign, declined comment, directing questions to Giuliani Partners, Mr. Giuliani’s security consulting firm. Mr. Giuliani leads all GOP presidential contenders in Massachusetts polls.

“Rudy Giuliani believes Alan Placa has been unjustly accused,” Sunny Mindel, a spokeswoman for the company, said in a prepared statement.

Monsignor Placa did not respond to a request for an interview.

The monsignor was closely associated with several Central Massachusetts priests who were at the center of a clergy sex abuse scandal in the 1990s.

At least three lawsuits were filed by area residents who said they were assaulted as boys by priests at the Whitinsville facility. The accused priests included colleagues of Monsignor Placa, one of whom was the Rev. Thomas A. Kane, former pastor of St. Mary Church in Uxbridge.

Monsignor Placa still lives in the rectory of the Long Island church where Monsignor Brendan Riordan, a former director of the House of Affirmation who was named in a sex abuse lawsuit settled by the Worcester Diocese in the mid-1990s, is pastor. He has also owned property in New York with Monsignor Riordan and co-owned property in Florida with him and Rev. Kane.

A 1993 suit filed against Rev. Kane, the diocese and the House of Affirmation by Mark Barry of Uxbridge alleges that Rev. Kane repeatedly sexually assaulted him. The New York Times has reported that Monsignor Placa was the first lawyer Rev. Kane turned to after learning of Mr. Barry’s accusations.

That suit was settled for less than $50,000 and included a non-disclosure provision. Mr. Barry has not spoken publicly about the case since.

David Lewcon, 53, of Northbridge, who worked at the center in the 1970s as a painter and wallpaperer helping his father, a contractor, renovate the 1898 building, has accused Rev. Kane of sexually assaulting him. Mr. Lewcon settled what he described as a “six-figure” lawsuit with the Worcester Diocese in which he alleged he was sexually assaulted as a minor by the Rev. Thomas H. Teczar at St. Mary in Uxbridge.

Mr. Lewcon described the House of Affirmation as a breeding ground for sexual predators.

“It was presented as a retreat for vocational redirection,” said Mr. Lewcon, a publisher of speciality magazines. “What we have found out since, and what it has been called in the Blackstone Valley by people who really know what went on there, is that it was a pedophile boot camp.”

Monsignor Placa’s involvement with the Whitinsville facility drew additional attention after the release of a 2003 report from a Suffolk County, N.Y., grand jury that accuses him of molesting young boys and, in his role as a lawyer, helping to cover up sex abuse by other priests.

He was referred to as “Priest F” in the grand jury’s lengthy investigative report, which quotes a letter he wrote to colleagues in which he touted his track record of settling multimillion dollar clergy sex abuse claims for “sums ranging from $20,000 to $100,000.” The 180-page report was written after more than 30 priests and more than 40 victims of abuse testified.

The report notes that no indictments were issued because the alleged crimes had occurred more than five years previously and could not be prosecuted because the statute of limitations had expired.

Richard Tollner, one of Monsignor Placa’s chief accusers in the Rockville Centre, Long Island, clergy sex abuse scandal, confirmed to the Salon online magazine that he was one of the victims who gave grand jury testimony and that Monsignor Placa was Priest F.

Monsignor Placa has denied Mr. Tollner’s allegations.

Mr. Tollner and other alleged victims in New York have accused Monsignor Placa of presenting himself as a priest in interviews with them when he was really acting as the lawyer for the Rockville Centre Diocese. Monsignor Placa has denied these accusations.

“He was misusing his identity and failing to disclose to them that he was a civil lawyer,” said Daniel J. Shea, a lawyer who has represented victims of clergy sex abuse in Central Massachusetts. “The grand jury report indicated he was representing himself to victims as a priest with a Roman collar.”

With news reports on Mr. Giuliani’s relationship to Monsignor Placa, some clergy abuse victims say they think Mr. Giuliani may be forced to answer harder questions about the link to his boyhood friend and employee.

George “Skip” Shea of Uxbridge, 47, an actor and artist who also agreed to an out-of-court settlement in a sex abuse case against Rev. Teczar, worked briefly at the House of Affirmation in the 1970s as a groundskeeper.

“It was a serious, full-blown sex mentality there,” George Shea said.

“Eventually this will stick,” he said of Monsignor Placa’s links to the GOP presidential contender.

Saturday, July 21, 2007

Bill O’ Liar defends pedophiles…….AGAIN!


Also, Billo’s blatant hypocrisy on the Daily Kos/ Jet Blue story and other lies and spin!

by Larry Simons
July 20, 2007

O’ Liar is at it again. Not only lying and spinning (his sport of old) but has taken up a new sport (at least for the past 7 months) …. defending pedophiles….and can you believe I have to say this word? "AGAIN"!! On his spin-logged show, “The O’ Reilly Factor” a few days ago, Billo had a guest on, a lawyer by the name of Bruce Baron, who is defending the sister of a Texas man, Lewis Conrad, who committed suicide last November when police arrived at his house to arrest him after he had solicited sex with a person who identified himself as a 13-year old boy in an internet chat room.

Since Dateline NBC was outside the man’s house recording the arrest, the sister of the deceased man is suing NBC for millions of dollars, even though there is not one shred of evidence that the man even knew the Dateline NBC was outside recording, or that his story was even going to be broadcast on national television. He killed himself before he could find out those things. During the segment with Mr. Baron, Billo, of course never mentioned this fact.

My readers very well know by now that it is established FACT that Billo defends pedophiles, as he did in the case of Shawn Hornbeck’s abductor, whom Billo put no blame on in that kidnapping. Instead, he blamed Hornbeck (11 at the time!) for not escaping and even saying Hornbeck LIKED being kidnapped. Now, Billo, in an attempt to smear NBC, (which has been his favorite hobby of the past 2 years), spins the story of this man who committed suicide in a child predator sting by blaming NBC for the man’s death, as the victim’s sister does.

In this case, Billo is not as blatant with his pedophile coddling as he was in the Hornbeck case. Instead, Billo just leaves out important facts, like the one mentioned above saying the victim did not even know NBC was at the house recording it, or that he was even a part of an expose piece on a show. Billo just ignores that in order to smear NBC, without even giving them credit for busting an internet child predator.

Here’s Olbermann’s story on this…excellent



As mentioned in the 2nd half of the clip below, Billo’s latest paranoia is the story of an airline company named Jet Blue, an airline “sponsoring” the DailyKos website. This is just more blatant hypocrisy from the Lord of Loofahs himself. Do you expect anything less?

This time he compares a “far-left, hateful” website to the KKK and the Nazis. Amazing how Billo makes these specific comparisons to these groups of people whenever he wants to think of a bad group to compare the DailyKos to, when I can actually cite DIRECT examples of far-right people who have said things DIRECTLY associated with the KKK and the Nazis! Shall we have some fun? Yes, we shall.

Here are some DIRECT examples of far-right hate speech that O’ Liar has never criticized:

"since [Sen. Barack] Obama [D-IL] has -- on his mother's side -- forebears of his mother had slaves, could we not say that if Obama wins the Democratic nomination and then wins the presidency, he will own [Rev.] Al Sharpton?" (Rush Limbaugh 3/3/07)

“You know, I think we should round up all of these folks. Round up Joy Behar, round up Matt Damon, who last night on MSNBC attacked George Bush and Dick Cheney. Round up Olbermann, take the whole bunch of them and put them in a detention camp until this war is over because they're a bunch of traitors." (Mike Gallagher 12/19/06)

those were just a FEW!

Naturally, this was more than enough for Billo to once again, take home first prize in Keith’s Worst Person segment



Here is a clip of O’ Liar with bought-and-paid-for Neo-con Dennis Miller in which you’ll see Miller agree with just about everything O’ Liar says about the DailyKos story. I was glad that Miller was in a different location than O’ Reilly or Miller just might have reached down and stroked Bill’s nuts. I watched this clip and jotted down some MORE Billo lies.

Here’s the clip:



First, Billo calls himself, “The Great Clarifier”. Clarifying doesn’t count when it’s clarifying SPIN and LIES Billo. Then, Billo tells Miller that he plans to ask Jet Blue if they have done anything for the military. And of course, we all know that no one on Earth has done more for the troops than Billo! Sending 20 minute phone cards to the troops and giving them copies of his stupid book (and that was ONLY if some stupid person BOUGHT a copy first!)...now those are 2 things I’m sure every troop in Iraq is just praying for on a daily basis. Death and destruction all around them every day and they are wondering what it says about secular progressives in chapter 4!

They might want phone cards…but 20 minute phone cards? Their shits probably last longer than 20 minutes! You mean to tell me $10 million a year-Billo can’t do better than that? He has the right to question or criticize ANYONE for what they may or may not do for the military???

Billo then goes on to criticize the DailyKos’ website for comments made about Tony Snow and Dick Cheney, but fails to mention terroristic comments made by Ann Coulter in recent years. Coulter has wished for the deaths of every employee inside the New York Times building and recently said she hopes John Edwards is killed in a terroristic plot. Pat Robertson publicly called for the assassination of Hugo Chavez. Even Billo wished for the death of 9-11 truther Kevin Barrett on the air saying this: “This guy would have been gone at Boston University, my alma mater, in a heartbeat. The Chancellor there, John Silber, would of--would have--this guy'd be in the Charles River floating down, you know, toward the harbor."

Billo then tells Miller, “Hate is hate no matter where it is”. He forgets to mention unless it comes from Ann Coulter, Pat Robertson or…..HIMSELF! Then Billo says the most unbelievable thing in the entire piece: “I’m a big free speech guy…I make my living, so do you…I’m not a censorship guy” OH REALLY BILLO???????????????????????????? Hmmmmmm, not a censorship guy huh???? So, your definition of censorship is NOT saying “shut up” to everyone who disagrees with you? Censorship to you is NOT cutting off the mikes of your guests?? Oh, you don’t do those things Billo, ya say? Let me guess Billo, I’m taking you “out of context”?? Time for more fun…….let’s watch!

Here’s Billo saying the Huffington Post should be censored, and admits his own site is censored!!!



In the above clip, Roy Sekoff of the Huffington Post tells O' Liar and Michelle "lips" Malkin of another comment that was made on the Huffington Post about Tony Snow by a man named Charles Karel Bouley that WAS removed when there was an uproar about it on the blog. The comment being removed wasn't enough for "lips" Malkin as she criticized the Huffington Post for not indicating to its readers/bloggers that the comment was corrected!! The ONLY way to show that a comment had been corrected is to keep or post the original comment that was made!

Well, if it's going to be posted that the man made this comment, wouldn't REMOVING it be pointless? "Lips" doesn't even know what she's saying! She's basically saying, "It's an outrage to have that despicable comment about Tony Snow on the blog, so please remove it!....oh, but keep it posted "somewhere" on the site that the comment was made originally so that when a correction or removal goes up, people can see that the original comment was made." That doesn't even make sense! Do they want the comment REMOVED or not?? They can't even make up their minds about what they want as a solution! It's unbelievable!

Here’s “no censorship” Billo cutting off the mic of Democratic consultant Robin Swanson!



…..cutting off the mic of Jeremy Glick!!



…..cutting off the mic of Colonel Ann Wright!! (Did I mention she was a Colonel? That would be the MILITARY! THIS is what Billo does for the military!)



…..but its not just Billo---censorship is a FOX News staple!!



Amazing….truly amazing that people still listen to this guy and take him seriously about….anything! You would think we live in a country where you can show people BLATANT lies on videotape and they would watch it and turn their heads in disgust and just not watch the bullshit anymore. But, sadly, there are still those out there that have no clue what is going on outside of their own little worlds…(the same one that Bush lives in apparently) and they still watch this tragedy that is Bill O’ Reilly.

I just showed you multiple times where Billo has lied…and it was EASY. It required hardly any time, any effort, and I just showed you at least 3 examples….just in THIS story, just on THIS day, just at THIS time. Times that by 200 (approx. amount of shows per year) and whatever that number is, times that by 11 (# of years O ‘Liar has been on FOX) and one can only be aghast at the total number of lies O’ Liar has under his belt…..I better stop…I may be getting Billo excited. (Thanks Keith)

Monday, July 16, 2007

Bush-loving Chickenhawk goes up against Sheehan and her supporters

Chickenhawk gets schooled by anti-war supporters

by Larry Simons
July 16, 2007

A Bush supporter confronts Cindy Sheehan and her supporters about the war. The man asks, "What happens to Iraq after we leave?" and of course, like all loud-mouthed Chickenhawks he just keeps talking and never lets the person answer. Sheehan tries to answer and the man just keeps talking. Shhehan tells the man that Bush has killed over 700,000 Iraqis (a fact) and that it was peaceful before we got there. The man mentions Saddam as if Saddam had anything to do with 9-11, which was the reason we were told we went there, and a lie that Bush is STILL telling.

Sheehan walks away, and her supporters stay and speak with the man, and eventually ask him since he likes the war, then go enlist. He says he’s too old and the military wouldn’t take him. Sheehan’s supporters say "They take ‘em up to 40 now, go enlist". Then, the man accuses them of "lying to support their agenda". Sheehan’s supporters tell the man that recruitment levels are low, and again the man calls them liars and just walks away.

This is a prime example of what a Chickenhawk is. You see it, right on the video. They love the war SO much, but when it comes to THEM doing the fighting----oh nooooo, can’t do that! Different story now, isn’t it?? They have the "the war is great as long as I don’t have to fight it" mentality. This is the philosophy of just about every Republican, right-wing TV personality or brainwashed American that hates facts like the man in the clip does.

Here is a link to a recent story that proves the recruitment levels are down so low, they are looking toward illegals to enlist. They should forget the illegals and go recruit war supporters like the man in the video that are still old enough to enlist and who openly admit like he did, "I’d LOVE to go fight!"

http://www.jbs.org/node/4479

Saturday, July 14, 2007

Ron Paul: U.S. In "Great Danger" Of Staged Terror

Congressman & presidential candidate warns of economic collapse precipitated by bombing of Iran

Paul Joseph Watson
PrisonPlanet
July 13, 2007

Presidential candidate Ron Paul says the U.S. is in "great danger" of a staged terror attack or a Gulf of Tonkin style provocation while also warning that a major collapse of the American economy is on the horizon and could be precipitated by the bombing of Iran and the closure of the Persian Gulf.

Speaking to The Alex Jones Show, the Texas Congressman was asked his opinion on Cindy Sheehan's recent comments that the U.S. is in danger of a staged terror attack or a Gulf of Tonkin style provocation that will validate the Neo-Con agenda and lead to the implementation of the infrastructure of martial law that Bush recently signed into law via executive order, as well as public pronouncements from prominent officials that the West needs terrorism to save a doomed foreign policy.

"I think we're in great danger of it," responded the Congressman, "We're in danger in many ways, the attack on our civil liberties here at home, the foreign policy that's in shambles and our obligations overseas and commitment which endangers our troops and our national defense."

"Every day we're in worse shape and right now there's an orchestrated effort to blame the Iranians for everything that's gone wrong in Iraq and we're quite concerned that the attack will be on Iran and that will jeopardize so many more of our troops, so I would say that we're in much greater danger than we even were four or five years ago," asserted Paul.

The presidential candidate expressed his despair that the situation in Iraq will not change until there is a total collapse of the American economy.

"There's no way we can afford what we're doing, whether it's domestic spending or the international spending and very few people talk about the real cost of this economically speaking....this is unsustainable and it will be a threat to our dollar," said Paul, adding that the onset of the meltdown could be sparked by the bombing of Iran and the closure of the Persian Gulf.

The Congressman added that the collapse was in its early stages with the major indication being a reduction in the living standard of middle class Americans but that "one single major world event" could change things overnight and precipitate a major downturn.

Paul added that there had "not been a national discussion on monetary policy in many many years" and the increasingly bleak outlook for the U.S. economy was also bringing more attention to the solutions the Congressman has proposed for reducing the burden of the mammoth national deficit.

Paul said that national and world events, especially the degrading situation in Iraq, were attracting support for his presidential campaign due to his resolute position on embracing a non-interventionist foreign policy.

The Congressman concluded by surmising that record lows in approval ratings for Bush, Cheney and Congress showed that, "The American people are alive and well and disgusted yet they haven't had good alternatives....it's justifiable, they are looking for true answers and options and quite frankly I think that's probably one of the reasons why our campaign is growing by leaps and bounds right now."

No Doubting Ron Paul's Warning Of Staged Terror
Debunkers question accuracy of previous article but presidential candidate had spoken in Congress about staged Gulf of Tonkin style provocation

Paul Joseph Watson
July 14, 2007

Debunkers and even some of our own readers have questioned the validity of an article we put out yesterday in which Ron Paul warned of the U.S. being in "great danger" of a staged provocation that would grease the skids for the bombing of Iran, but the Congressman made similar statements in a speech before Congress back in January.

Here's an example of an e mail we received from an angry reader.

"DAMN YOU, ALEX! Ron Paul did NOT say what you said he did in your article. THOSE WERE YOUR DAMN WORDS. Not his. Congratulations, ***hole. You have next to destroyed his campaign. Are you proud!"

"I listened to the show yesterday and I don't believe that's exactly what Ron Paul said," added another.

Listen to the MP3. This is the question that Alex Jones asked the Congressman.

"Congressman, just out of the gates, Cindy Sheehan on my show yesterday went further than anybody's ever gone, she said 'distinct chance of staged terror attack' or the government allowing that to happen, Bush is saying he doesn't care what the people want, the war will continue, they've set up the Military Commissions Act, they've set up the John Warner Defense Authorization Act, he's signed PDD 51 making himself literally dictator, he gave himself that power - how much danger are we in now with Homeland Security head feeling in his gut we're about to be hit, Republican memos saying they need terror attacks, they need Al-Qaeda to hit us to be able to continue the war, top military strategists saying it - how much danger are we in of some new Gulf of Tonkin provocation?"

"Well, I think we're in great danger of it," responded Ron Paul.

The Congressman agrees with the question, that the U.S. is in danger of a "Gulf of Tonkin provocation" or a "staged terror attack", as are both cited in the question. How anyone can infer anything different from this exchange is puzzling.

Ron Paul has appeared on The Alex Jones Show dozens of times and is fully aware of Alex's style and in what context the question was set.

The August 1964 Gulf of Tonkin incident, where US warships were apparently attacked by North Vietnamese PT Boats, was cited by President Johnson as a legitimate provocation mandating U.S. escalation in Vietnam, yet Tonkin was a staged charade that never took place. Declassified LBJ presidential tapes discuss how to spin the non-event to escalate it as justification for air strikes and the NSA faked intelligence data to make it appear as if two US ships had been lost. Tonkin was the ultimate example of staged terror or a staged provocation.

Indeed Ron Paul warned of the danger of a staged provocation on the floor of Congress back in January, when he spoke of his concern about "A contrived Gulf of Tonkin- type incident may occur to gain popular support for an attack on Iran."

Watch the video below.



Here's the full speech archived on Ron Paul's Congressional website.

With former Republican Senators, top military analysts and even GOP memos all having recently invited a new terror attack or provocation to save a doomed foreign policy, the realization that a false-flag event may occur is not some rabid fantasy of a group of tin-foil hat wearing schizophrenics, as AOL have tried to spin it in an article today, it's a political reality that many, including Congressman Ron Paul, fully accept and feel compelled to warn about.

Friday, July 13, 2007

Olbermann Special Comment: All hail the prophetic gut!

Olbermann on the TRUE sign of impending terror….Michael Chertoff’s “gut”

Countdown with Keith Olbermann
July 12, 2007

And now as promised, a Special Comment — on Michael Chertoff’s gut.

You have by now heard the remark — instantly added to our through-the-looking glass lexicon of the 21st Century, a time when we suddenly started referring to this country as “the homeland” as if anybody here has used that term since Charles Lindbergh or the German-American Bund in 1940.

Michael Chertoff’s “gut feeling.”

Which, he took pains to emphasize, was based on no specific nor even vague intelligence — that we are entering a period of increased risk of terrorism here. He got as specific as saying that Al-Qaeda seems to like the summer, but as to the rest of it, he is perfectly content to let us sit and wait and worry - and to contemplate his gut.

His….. gut!!

We used to have John Ashcroft’s major announcements.
We used to have David Paulison’s breathless advisories about how to use duct tape against radiation attacks.
We used to have Tom Ridge’s color-coded threat levels.
Now we have…. Michael Chertoff’s gut!



Once, we thought we were tip-toeing along a Grand Canyon of possible and actual freedoms and civil liberties destroyed, as part of some kind of nauseating but ultimately necessary and intricately-designed plan to stop future 9/11’s or even future Glasgow car bombers who wind up having to get out and push their failed weapons.

Now it turns out we are risking all of our rights and protections — and risking the anger and hatred of the rest of the world — for the sake of Michael Chertoff’s gut.

I have pondered this supreme expression of diminished expectations, for parts of three days now. I have concluded that there are only five possible explanations for Mr. Chertoff’s remarkable revelations about his transcendently important counter-terrorism stomach.

Firstly, Mr. Chertoff, you are as Richard Wolffe said here the other night, actually referencing not your gut but your backside — as in, “covering it.” C-Y-A. Not only has there not been a terrorist attack stopped in this country, but your good old Homeland Security hasn’t even unraveled a plausible terrorist plan.

And you and your folks there have a different kind of stomach pain, knowing that with a track record that consists largely of two accomplishments — inconveniencing people at airports, and scaring them everywhere else — your department doesn’t know what the hell it’s doing, and even you Mr. Chertoff, know it.

Secondly, of course, there is the explanation of choice for those millions of us who have heard the shrill and curiously timed cries of wolf over the past six years — what we’ve called here “The Nexus of Politics and Terror” — that there isn’t anything cooking, and your “gut feeling” was actually that you’d better throw up a diversion soon on Mr. Bush’s behalf, or… something real – like the Republicans’ revolt about Iraq, and the nauseating “gut feeling” that we have gotten 3,611 Americans killed there for no reason — was actually going to seep into the American headlines and consciousness.

It’s impossible to prove a negative, to guarantee that you and your predecessors deliberately scared the American public just for the political hell of it — even though your predecessor Mr. Ridge admitted he had his suspicions about exactly that.

Suffice to say, Mr. Chertoff, if it ever can be proved, there will be a lot of people from Homeland Security, and other outposts of this remarkably corrupt Administration, who will be going to prison.

Thirdly, and most charitably, I guess, Mr. Chertoff, is the possibility that you have made some credible inference that we are really at greater risk right now, but that any detail might blow some sort of attempt at interruption. There is some silver lining in this one.
But the silver lining would have been a greater one if this National Counter-Terrorism Center Report hadn’t leaked out the day after you introduced us to your gut; a report suggesting Al-Qaeda had re-built its operational capacity to pre-9/11 levels.

Not only did this latest hair-on-fire-missive remind us that Al-Qaeda’s re-growth has been along the Pakistan/Afghanistan border…
Not only did it remind us that your boss let this happen by shifting his resources out of Afghanistan to Iraq for his own vain and foolish purposes, to say nothing of ignoring Pakistan…
Not only did it underscore the ominous truth that if this country is victimized again by Al-Qaeda, the personal responsibility for the failure of our misplaced defenses would belong to President Bush and President Bush alone…

But on top of all of it, Mr. Chertoff, it revealed you for the phony expert you are — the kid who hears in confidence something smart from somebody smart, and then makes his prediction, that what the smart kid said confidentially, is about to happen.

It reads just as you revised the “gut” remark this morning, sir — the “informed opinion.” The kid telling stories out of school.

The fourth possibility is a simple reversal of the third, Mr. Chertoff. You shot off your bazoo, and then this National Counter-Terrorism Center report was rushed out — even created — to cover you, to give you credibility, to cloud the reality that you actually intoned to the Chicago Tribune, the 21st Century equivalent of “by the pricking of my thumb, something wicked this way comes.”

But the fifth possible explanation of your gut, Mr. Chertoff, is the real nightmare scenario.

And it is simple.

That you, the man who famously told us “Louisiana is a city that is largely under water,” meant this, literally. That we really have been reduced to listening to see if your gut will growl. That your intestines are our best defense.
That your bowels are our listening devices, your digestive tract is full of augurs, your colon produces the results that the torture at Gitmo does not.

All hail the prophetic gut!

So there are your choices: bureaucratic self-protection, political manipulation of the worst kind, the dropping of opaque hints, a gaffe backfilled by an “instant report,” or the complete disintegration of our counter-terror effort.
Even if there really is never another terror attempt in this country, we have already lost too much in these last six years, to now have to listen to Michael Chertoff’s gut, no matter what its motivation.

We cannot and will not turn this country into a police state. But even those of us who say that most loudly and insistently, acknowledge that some stricter measures, under the still-stricter supervision of as many watchdogs as we can summon, are appropriate.

But you’re not even going to wring any of that from us, Mr. Chertoff, if we’re going to hear remarks about your “gut feelings.” You have reduced yourself to the status of a hunch-driven clown, and it’s probably time you turned your task over to somebody who represents the brain and not the gut…

Certainly to somebody who does not, as you do now, represent that other part of the anatomy — the one through which the body disposes of what the stomach doesn’t want.

Thursday, July 12, 2007

Firefighters Challenge Giuliani’s Self-Proclaimed ‘Leadership Experience’


by Seth Michaels
AFL-CIO
July 11, 2007

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani portrays himself as the hero of Sept. 11, and the media takes this claim for granted. But New York City firefighters, who know best, say it’s a different story.

The Fire Fighters (IAFF) union is releasing a new video today, featuring New York firefighters and their families, that challenges Giuliani’s claims of leadership. His performance before, during and after the Sept. 11 attacks, they contend, is marked by serious failures—failures that cost lives.

The video will be distributed on DVD and also will be available online at www.rudy-urbanlegend.com.

The Boston Globe reports:

“He’s not a leader. He is running on 9/11, and it’s all a fallacy,” says Jim Riches, the father of a Sept. 11 victim and a deputy New York fire chief, in the video.

The Fire Fighters point out that the Giuliani administration didn’t provide police and firefighters with inter-operable radios, leaving many firefighters inside the World Trade Center unable to communicate, even as the towers’ collapse was imminent. The radios are a very real symbol of what firefighters describe as Giuliani’s failure to understand the threat of a terrorist attack and his inability to coordinate an effective response.

Here is the video:



In the weeks after the attack, firefighters attempted to search for the remains of their comrades who died during the rescue attempt, but Giuliani made the decision to remove them from the site and haul the wreckage to a landfill.

The Fire Fighters also note that, even after a 1993 terrorist attack on the World Trade Center site, Giuliani chose to house the city’s emergency response operation in the World Trade Center.

Other flaws in Giuliani’s handling of the deadly attacks have been documented in The New York Times, where Giuliani was said to have “seized control” of the cleanup attempts and “ran a generally slipshod, haphazard, uncoordinated, unfocused response” that led to serious illness among workers at Ground Zero. Giuliani’s leadership also was challenged in the book Grand Illusion, released last year and excerpted in the Village Voice.

Giuliani’s run for president is tightly bound with his national image in the wake of Sept. 11, so this video by New York firefighters provides a needed perspective on Giuliani’s claims. The IAFF will release copies of the 13-minute video to its 280,000 members in coming days.

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

Bush Administration Prays For More Dead Americans

Officials don't "worry" about terror, they crave it to save doomed foreign policy and are actively bankrolling Al-Qaeda in Iran

Paul Joseph Watson
PrisonPlanet
July 11, 2007

'Officials worry of summer terror attack' reads an Associated Press headline today as Americans are served up their weekly dose of bellicose fearmongering.

But officials don't worry about another attack, they crave one - to save a doomed foreign policy and bolster approval ratings that have now slumped to an all time low.

This is not the conclusion of paranoid tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy theorists, but a viewpoint held by major University foreign policy analysts like Lt.-Col. Doug Delaney, chair of the war studies program at the Royal Military College in Kingston, Ontario, who recently told the Toronto Star that "The key to bolstering Western resolve is another terrorist attack like 9/11 or the London transit bombings of two years ago."

It was also explicitly expressed in a 2005 GOP memo, which yearned for new attacks that would "validate" the President's war on terror and "restore his image as a leader of the American people."

This past weekend, former Republican Senator Rick Santorum suggested that a series of "unfortunate events," namely terrorist attacks, will occur within the next year and change American citizen's perception of the war.

Last month, the new chairman of the Arkansas Republican Party Dennis Milligan said that there needed to be more attacks on American soil for President Bush to regain popular approval.

"At the end of the day, I believe fully the president is doing the right thing, and I think all we need is some attacks on American soil like we had on [Sept. 11, 2001]," Milligan told the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, "And the naysayers will come around very quickly to appreciate not only the commitment for President Bush, but the sacrifice that has been made by men and women to protect this country," he concluded.

Since it's now accepted that terror attacks boost both the domestic and geopolitical agenda of the Bush administration, how is it in their interest to prevent them?

We are forced to suffer Homeland Security head Michael Chertoff openly engaging in terrorist activity (defined as generating fear of another attack) by sharing with us his "gut feeling" that another big bang is coming this summer, while "Senior U.S. intelligence officials tell ABC News new intelligence suggests a small al Qaeda cell is on its way to the United States, or may already be here."

Why should we expect anything other than the red carpet to be rolled out for Al-Qaeda, who are now working directly for the CIA in Iran to destabilize Ahmadinejad's government?

This point cannot be stressed strongly enough - while the White House is apparently meeting on Thursday in an urgent effort to counter Al-Qaeda's plans, they are bankrolling and arming an Al-Qaeda group formerly headed by the alleged mastermind of 9/11, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, which has been held responsible for a number of bombings in both Iran and Pakistan.

Chertoff is completely accurate when he says that Al-Qaeda are "rebuilding their activities" - but what he won't tell you is that they are doing so with the direct aid of the very highest echelons of the U.S. government!

Since the apparent flap over new terror is based primarily on Chertoff's "gut", we'd be loathe to forget the admission of his predecessor Tom Ridge, who revealed that the Bush administration routinely raised the color coded terror alert based on the flimsiest of evidence.

Former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer went further in May 2002, when he admitted that fake terror alerts were used to distract attention from mounting criticism that the Bush administration sat on intelligence warnings in the weeks before the September 11 attacks.

In January of 2003 FBI and CIA whistleblowers told Capitol Hill Blue that the White House was scripting phony terror alerts to maintain hysteria, upkeep President Bush’s approval ratings and milk extra defense funding.

On May 27, 2004 John Ashcroft announced intelligence indicating that an Al Qaeda cell had been pinpointed as plotting to attack American landmarks in the summer. At least two of the terrorists named were already in jail. The 'cell' that these individuals are said to belong to didn't even exist. The Abu Hafs al Masri group was described by the Boston Globe as a 'phantom organization'. Their researchers could find no evidence that the group was real.

These are just a handful of examples proving the nexus of politics and terror and that such alerts are issued merely to prop up flagging support for the war while diverting from the latest scandal to embroil the White House.

Six months later and with the "surge" predictably having had no effect, Bush has seemingly returned to lowest common denominator propaganda by again linking the war in Iraq to 9/11.

“The same people that attacked us on September the 11th is a crowd that is now bombing people, killing innocent men, women and children, many of whom are Muslims,” Bush told a Cleveland town hall meeting yesterday.

So while the White House claim that Al Qaeda is driving the violence in Iraq and Al-Qaeda cells are gearing up to strike the U.S., they are actively supporting Al-Qaeda in an effort to topple Iran.

In all three instances, the U.S. government is using Al-Qaeda to further its agenda while praying for more dead Americans at home to reinvigorate popular support behind policies that are detested by the majority of the American people.

Michael Moore slams CNN, Wolf Blitzer on live TV

David Edwards and Josh Catone
Raw Story
July 10, 2007

Before a live interview with documentary filmmaker Michael Moore, CNN aired a segment entitled "Sicko Reality Check" in which Dr. Sanjay Gupta, the network's chief medical correspondent, aimed to keep Moore "honest" and fact check his new film, Sicko.

The 4-minute piece concluded that Moore "did fudge the facts," and implied that Sicko was misleading in portraying health care systems in other countries, such as France, the UK, and Canada, as better than the one in the US.

When given a chance to speak, Moore immediately put host Wolf Blitzer on the defensive.

"That report was so biased, I can't imagine what pharmaceutical company's ads are coming up right after our break here," said Moore. "Why don't you tell the truth to the American people? I wish that CNN and the other mainstream media would just for once tell the truth about what's going on in this country."





Moore argued that CNN has such a lousy track record of reporting the truth about the war in Iraq and asking tough questions, that Americans should be skeptical of their reporting on health care.

"You're the ones who are fudging the facts," said Moore. "You've fudged the facts to the American people now for I don't know how long about this issue, about the war, and I'm just curious, when are you going to just stand there and apologize to the American people for not bringing the truth to them that isn't sponsored by some major corporation?"

Blizter grew defensive and backed up his fellow CNN employee, saying that he would stand behind correspondent Sanjay Gupta's record on medical issues. Moore, in response, vowed to post a rebuttal to his website, MichaelMoore.com, showing that Gupta's facts weren't accurate.

"I'm going to put the real facts up there on my website," said Moore, "so that people can see what he just said was absolutely wrong."

Turning to the war in Iraq, Moore accused Gupta, who spent time embedded with US troops in Iraq, and the mainstream media at large of refusing "to ask our leaders the hard questions, and demand the honest answers." Moore laid the blame for the continued US involvement in the war in Iraq at the feet of the media, arguing that they failed to do their jobs and question the Bush war policy.

Blitzer refused to argue with Moore about Iraq, and instead steered the conversation back to the topic of health care. Moore was asked which of the US presidential candidates he thought would best fix America's health care system.

Moore did not name a specific candidate, but said that the Democratic candidates as a whole need to be more specific about how they plan to achieve their goal of universal health care.

"Our own government admits that because of the 47 million who aren't insured, we now have about 18,000 people a year that die in this country, simply because they don't have health insurance. That's six 9/11s every single year," concluded Moore. We need "universal health care that's free for everyone who lives in this country, it'll cost us less than what we're spending now lining the pockets of these private health insurance companies, or these pharmaceutical companies."

After the interview, Blitzer found sympathy from fellow CNN hosts Lou Dobbs and Jack Cafferty.

"After watching that Michael Moore interview," said Cafferty, "I've decided whatever CNN's paying it ain't enough."

The following video is from CNN's The Situation Room, broadcast on July 9.

Saturday, July 7, 2007

Bill O’ Liar SILENCED in Washington D.C.

How will O' Liar spin THIS story on his TV show? I know! He won't mention it!

Paul Farhi
The Washington Post
July 6, 2007

Yesterday, (July 5) WJFK (106.7 FM) dropped Bill O'Reilly's nationally syndicated show, "The Radio Factor," and replaced it with a sports-talk program hosted by Jim Rome.

O'Reilly, an avowed independent who takes many conservative views, occupied a two-hour afternoon slot on WJFK.

The popular Fox News Channel TV host never attracted much of a radio following in Washington -- in the most recent ratings period, his program had about 1.2 percent of the audience. But then, neither have many other conservatives, whose programs are popular in many cities but barely move the ratings needle in the Washington area, the nation's eighth-largest radio market.



Such radio stars of the right as Laura Ingraham, Glenn Beck and Michael Savage at times have literally had no ratings in Washington, as measured by Arbitron. That's partly because those hosts are carried on WTNT (570 AM), a station that has a weak signal, no local programming and little promotion. Last month, for example, the Clear Channel-owned station attracted an average of just 0.5 percent of the listening audience.

But another reason is that political talk in Washington isn't particularly popular, period. The most popular political-talk station in town, WMAL, finished 11th among all stations in May. In addition to Limbaugh, whose show aired opposite O'Reilly's, WMAL carries conservative talkers Sean Hannity in the late afternoon, "The Grandy and Andy Morning Show," and Chris Core in late mornings.

"Washington is an unusual talk market," says Jim Farley, who oversees programming for all-news WTOP and news-and-talk Washington Post Radio. "In most other cities our size, you have two competing right-wing stations. . . . Political talk radio just hasn't gotten the same traction here."

That's not a comment on the politics of the listening audience, says Farley: "It's not that we're a liberal town." By comparison, Seattle and San Francisco -- two famously liberal areas -- have popular conservative stations. And "Savage Nation," the radio show hosted by Savage, who was once fired by MSNBC for making anti-gay slurs, is a perennial hit in the Bay Area.

Sometimes, though, it takes more than a strong personality to make a show work, says Michael Harrison, the editor of Talkers, a magazine that covers talk radio.

A strong signal and strong lead-in programming also help, he says.

O'Reilly's program was out of step with the rest of WJFK's lineup, which includes the humorous Junkies morning program, "The Opie & Anthony Show" and "The Don and Mike Show" -- all of which mock politics and politicians.

O'Reilly also had the misfortune to be up against Limbaugh, whose program is typically among the top three on the air when it airs from noon to 3 p.m.

Weak signals, of course, can do in liberals as well as conservatives. WWRC (1260 AM), which offers "progressive talk" featuring liberal hosts such as Stephanie Miller and Ed Schultz, has smaller ratings than even WTNT. WWRC's audience is so small that it hasn't shown up in Arbitron rankings in years.

Chris Berry, president and general manager of WMAL, says there's nothing particularly unusual about Washington and political talk radio, except that "people in D.C. are smarter" than talk audiences in other towns. "In Boston, Chicago, even L.A., it's more emotional," he says. "In D.C., people really do know the issues."


Commentary
by Larry Simons

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

Friday, July 6, 2007

Globalists To Formally Propose Merger Of U.S., Canada, Mexico

North American Union to be presented to Congress by powerful think tank

Paul Joseph Watson
PrisonPlanet
July 5, 2007

Globalist political heavyweights are preparing to formally propose to Congress the merger of the U.S., Canada and Mexico into a North American Union at the end of summer after they held secret meetings to devise a plan that will be presented to representatives of all three governments.

"A powerful think tank chaired by former Sen. Sam Nunn and guided by trustees including Richard Armitage, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Harold Brown, William Cohen and Henry Kissinger, is in the final stages of preparing a report to the White House and U.S. Congress on the benefits of integrating the U.S., Mexico and Canada into one political, economic and security bloc," reports World Net Daily.

"The data collected for the report is based on seven secret roundtable sessions involving between 21 and 45 people and conducted by CSIS. The participants are politicians, business people, labor leaders and academics from all three countries with equal representation."

The report is entitled "North American Future 2025 Project" and was prepared in collaboration with the Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS), who were previously instrumental in the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1994.

The plan outlines an agenda to unify the three countries into a European Union style power bloc.
Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) documents released under the FOIA show that a wide range of US administrative law is being re-written in stealth under this program to "integrate" and "harmonize" with administrative law in Mexico and Canada, just as has become commonplace within the EU.

The documents contain references to upwards of 13 working groups within an entire organized infrastructure that has drawn from officials within most areas of administrative government including U.S. departments of State, Homeland Security, Commerce, Treasury, Agriculture, Transportation, Energy, Health and Human Services, and the office of the U.S. Trade Representative.

The United States and the European Union have signed up to a new transatlantic economic partnership that will see regulatory standards "harmonized" and will lay the basis for a merging of the US and EU into one single market.

18 states have introduced resolutions calling on their federal representatives to halt work on the North American Union (they include Virginia and South Carolina). Three of these states (Idaho, Montana and Oklahoma) have passed their resolutions.

22 U.S. Congressmen, including NC's Virginia Foxx and Walter Jones, along with all three Republican Congressmen running for President, have signed on as co-sponsors of HCR40, which calls on the executive branch to end all work on the North American Union and NAFTA superhighway.