Saturday, April 28, 2007

RE: It's THE FUKIN NEWS 04/27/07

----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
From: Pamela's Protest
Date: Apr 28, 2007 10:45 AM

Labels: , , , ,


RE: RE: Gov't posted 38,700 Social Security numbers

----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
From: ♥ Angel ♥ ™
Date: Apr 28, 2007 12:01 PM

Thanks: Guinea: The 1930's Smut Peddler

Gov't posted 38,700 Social Security numbers
Data was of all recipients of Agriculture Department grants since 1996

- The Social Security numbers of 38,700 people who received Agriculture Department grants have been posted on a government Web site since 1996, but they were taken down last week.

Free credit monitoring is being offered to those affected.

The security breach was only noticed last week and promptly closed, the Agriculture Department and Census Bureau announced Friday.

The Agriculture data that included Social Security numbers were removed from the Web on April 13 and similar data from 32 other agencies were taken down April 17 as a precaution, said Agriculture spokeswoman Terri Teuber.

A review has determined that none of the other 32 agencies had a similar problem, said Sean Kevelighan, spokesman for the Office of Management and Budget.

“There is no evidence that this information has been misused,” Teuber added. “However, due to the potential that this information was downloaded prior to being removed, USDA will provide the additional monitoring service.”

The breach was discovered by Marsha Bergmeier, president of Mohr Family Farms in Fairmount, Ill. “I was Googling my farm name at 11 p.m. when I couldn’t sleep,” she said in a telephone interview, and details of her land loan came up in the second listing of the Google search, a private Web site that reposted the government data.

‘It’s still out there in the world’
The next morning, April 13, she contacted the Agriculture Department, her congressman, Rep. Tim Johnson, the private Web site and the Census Bureau and was surprised by how quickly they removed the personal information.

“If somebody downloaded it, it’s still out there in the world,” she said. “That will never be a private number again.”

Chris Hoofnagle, senior attorney at the University of California at Berkeley law school clinic on technology, said the only federal law violated by such a breach is the Privacy Act, but the Supreme Court had ruled last year that victims could only collect damages for measurable losses to ID thieves, not merely for anxiety.

Nevertheless, the incident is likely to spur passage of a federal law requiring notification of potential victims when personally identifiable information is disclosed or stolen electronically, Hoofnagle predicted. Already 35 states have such a law.

When the breach was reported to the Agriculture Department on April 13, there were Social Security numbers for 47,000 recipients of grants from the department’s Farm Services Agency and from USDA Rural Development on a public Web site maintained by the Census Bureau.

Extent of breach downgraded
The department originally said Friday the Social Security numbers of 105,000 to 150,000 individuals had been entered into federal databases open to the public since 1981. But by Friday evening, USDA downgraded that number to 63,000, and then again on Monday to 38,700.

"USDA staff continued analysis of the identification numbers throughout the weekend and determined that approximately 38,700 actually contain private information," the department said in a news release.

The data has only been posted on the Internet by the Census Bureau since 1996.

The Census Bureau collects the grants made by 33 federal agencies and posts them on the Internet without analysis. By law, the names of these recipients and how much money they got are public records.

The disclosure comes six months after a congressional report found federal workers at 19 agencies had lost personal information affecting thousands of employees and the public, raising concerns about the government’s ability to protect sensitive information.

Growing problem
In all, the House Government Reform Committee reported 788 incidents involving the loss or compromise of sensitive personal information since Jan. 1, 2003. That was in addition to the “hundreds of security and privacy incidents” at the Department of Veterans Affairs, according to a report the committee issued in October.

Teuber said the two Agriculture Department programs involved gave each grant a 15-digit identifying number. Included among those digits was the recipient’s 9-digit Social Security number. There was nothing on the Web site that indicated the grant number contained the Social Security number, but the recipient who reported the problem recognized her Social Security number in the grant number, Teuber said.

To avoid revealing information that could increase the vulnerability of this private data, Teuber said Agriculture was not releasing more details, including the Web address, of the government site where this information was disclosed until all potentially compromised recipients have been notified.

The Agriculture Department is sending registered mail notifications to 150,000 recipients identified as having been part of the public database since 1981, but Teuber said some people are on the list more than once.

At an estimated taxpayer cost of $4 million, Agriculture is offering each of them free credit monitoring for one year, Teuber said.

USDA funding recipients who wish to take advantage of the credit monitoring offer will receive instructions on how to register. Any USDA funding recipient with questions may call 1-800-FED-INFO (1-800-333-4636) or visit The call center operates from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. EDT, Monday-Friday.

Under supervision of the Office of Management and Budget, the grant numbers posted by the other 32 agencies were taken down and reviewed to see if any included Social Security numbers. “We are sure no other agencies ... were impacted by similar problems,” said OMB’s Kevelighan. He attributed the quick response to government-wide safeguards set up after the Veterans Affairs Department problems last year.

Teuber said an unknown number of private Web sites had downloaded and reposted the information, but she said at least one of them, OMB Watch, had also removed the identifying grant numbers.

OMB Watch director Gary D. Bass said Bergmeier contacted his group April 13 after finding her number on the Web site of his public interest group. The group referred her to Agriculture and Census, where it got the data.

Labels: , , , , , , ,


RE: The Blame Game

----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
From: Conspiracy Theorist Clothing co
Date: Apr 28, 2007 2:12 PM

The Blame Game
The Daily Show

To repost, copy and paste the text below:

Click here to see our products!

Labels: , , , , , , , ,


RE: Gun control coming... with no vote!

----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
From: ♥ Angel ♥ ™
Date: Apr 28, 2007 3:09 PM

Thank you to:
Cops Say "Legalize All Drugs"

From Gun Owners of America

Congressional Leaders Moving To Pass Gun Control Without A Vote!
-- McCarthy bill would treat gun owners even worse than terrorists
Gun Owners of America
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102
Springfield, VA 22151
"Another gun rights group, the Gun Owners of America, is adamantly opposed to the [McCarthy-Dingell] legislation. It said the measure would allow the government to trample privacy rights by compiling reams of personal information and potentially bar mentally stable people from buying guns." -- Associated Press, April 24, 2007

Thursday, April 26, 2007

This is going to be a knock-down, drag-out fight. GOA continues to stand alone in the trenches, defending the rights of gun owners around the country. It's not going to be easy.

Gun control supporters want to pass gun control within the next couple of weeks. And that's why, even if you took action earlier this week, you need to do so once again.

All the gun haters (who have been keeping silent for a while) are now coming out of the closet and into the open. Take the notoriously anti-gun senator from New York -- Chuck Schumer. He has been very, very excited this week. Recent events have given him a platform, and the excuse, to push legislation that he had sponsored years ago -- legislation that never got through Congress.

You see, Senator Chuck Schumer has been, in past years, the Senate sponsor of the McCarthy bill (HR 297). And the recent murders at Virginia Tech have given Senator Schumer the pretext he has been looking for. Appearing on the Bill O'Reilly show earlier this week, Schumer did his best to make a reasonable-sounding pitch for more gun control.

He told O'Reilly on Monday that while he and Rep. McCarthy had previously worked together on this legislation, he now wants Congress to take up HR 297 quickly. "The Brady Law is a reasonable limitation," Schumer said. "Some might disagree with me, but I think certain kinds of licensing and registration is a reasonable limitation. We do it for cars."

Get the picture? First, he wants the Brady Law strengthened with the McCarthy-Dingell-Schumer legislation. Then it's off to pass more gun control -- treating guns like cars, where all gun owners are licensed and where bureaucrats will have a wonderful confiscation list.

In the O'Reilly interview, Schumer showed his hand when he revealed the strategy for this bill. Because it could become such a hot potato -- thanks to your efforts -- Senator Schumer is pushing to get this bill passed by Unanimous Consent in the Senate, which basically means that the bill would get passed WITHOUT A VOTE.

This is a perfect way to pass gun control without anyone getting blamed... or so they think. We need to tell every Senator that if this bill passes without a vote, then we hold ALL OF THEM responsible. (Be looking for a future GOA alert aimed at your Senators.)

On the House side, the Associated Press reported this past Monday that "House Democratic leaders are working with the National Rifle Association to bolster existing laws blocking" certain prohibited persons from buying guns. Of course, there are at least three problems with this approach:

1. It's morally and constitutionally wrong to require law-abiding citizens to first prove their innocence to the government before they can exercise their rights -- whether it's Second Amendment rights, First Amendment rights, or any other right. Doing that gives bureaucrats the opportunity to abuse their power and illegitimately prevent honest gun owners from buying guns.

2. Bureaucrats have already used the Brady Law to illegitimately deny the Second Amendment rights of innocent Americans. Americans have been prevented from buying guns because of outstanding traffic tickets, because of errors, because the NICS computer system has crashed -- and don't forget returning veterans because of combat-related stress. You give an anti-gun bureaucrat an inch, he'll take a mile -- which we have already seen as GOA has documented numerous instances of the abuses mentioned above.

3. Finally, all the background checks in the world will NOT stop bad guys from getting firearms. As we mentioned in the previous alert, severe restrictions in Washington, DC, England, Canada, Germany and other places have not stopped evil people from using guns to commit murder. (Correction: In our previous alert, we incorrectly identified Ireland as the location of the infamous schoolyard massacre. In fact, it took place in Dunblane, Scotland in 1996 -- a country which at the time had even more stringent laws than we have here.)


HR 297 would require the states to turn over mountains of personal data (on people like you) to the FBI -- any information which according to the Attorney General, in his or her unilateral discretion, would be useful in ascertaining who is or is not a "prohibited person."

Liberal support for this bill points out an interesting hypocrisy in their loyalties: For six years, congressional Democrats have complained about the Bush administration's efforts to obtain personal information on suspected terrorists WITHOUT A COURT ORDER.

And yet, this bill would allow the FBI to obtain massive amounts of information -- information which dwarfs any records obtained from warrantless searches (or wiretaps) that have been conducted by the Bush Administration on known or suspected terrorists operating in the country.

In fact, HR 297 would allow the FBI to get this information on honest Americans (like you) even though the required data is much more private and personal than any information obtained thus far by the Bush administration on terrorists.

And all of these personal records would be obtained by the FBI with no warrant or judicial or Congressional oversight whatsoever!!!

Get the picture? Spying on terrorists is bad... but spying on honest gun owners is good. After all, this horrific intrusion on the private lives of all Americans is presumed to be "okay" because it's only being used to bash guns, not to go after terrorists and criminals who are trying to kill us.

As indicated in earlier alerts, this information could include your medical, psychological, financial, education, employment, traffic, state tax records and more. We don't even know the full extent of what could be included because HR 297 -- which can be viewed at [url][/url] by typing in the bill number -- is so open-ended. It requires states to provide the NICS system with ALL RECORDS that the Attorney General believes will help the FBI determine who is and who is not a prohibited person. Certainly, an anti-gun AG like Janet Reno would want as many types of records in the system as possible.

The provision that would probably lead to the greatest number of 'fishing expeditions' is that related to illegal aliens. Federal law prohibits illegal aliens from owning guns. The bill requires all "relevant" data related to who is in this country illegally. But what records pertaining to illegal aliens from the states would be relevant? Perhaps a better question would be, what records are not relevant?

1. Please take a moment to communicate your opposition to HR 297 -- even if you already sent your Representative a note earlier this week. We have provided a new letter (below) which provides updated information relating to the battle we are fighting.

House leaders are talking about bringing up this bill soon. And Sen. Schumer (in his interview with O'Reilly) even hinted at the fact that the bill could come up WITHOUT the ability to offer pro-gun amendments -- such as a repeal of the DC gun ban or reciprocity for concealed carry holders -- provisions that could potentially serve as killer amendments.

Also -- oh yeah, this is going to upset you -- Senator Schumer told O'Reilly, "I got to tell you, a lot of NRA people, they support this." Can you believe that? Senator Schumer is claiming to speak for you! That’s why it's so important that you once again tell your congressman that Schumer is wrong... that you're a supporter of gun rights who OPPOSES the anti-gun McCarthy-Dingell bill.

2. Please circulate this e-mail and forward it to as many gun owners as you can.

CONTACT INFORMATION: You can visit the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center to send your Representative the pre-written e-mail message below. And, you can call your Representative toll-free at 1-877-762-8762.

----- Pre-written letter -----
Dear Representative:

As a supporter of Second Amendment rights, I do NOT support HR 297, the NICS Improvement Act. I hope that you will OPPOSE this bill and urge your party leadership to either kill it outright or to allow other pro-gun amendments to be offered (repeal of the DC gun ban, reciprocity for concealed carry holders, etc.).

In its current form, HR 297 will treat gun owners even worse than terrorists, giving the FBI a mountain of private information on law-abiding Americans like me.

How is it that, despite all the criticism over the Bush administration's attempts to obtain personal information on suspected terrorists without a court order, this bill would allow the FBI to obtain massive amounts of information on ME -- information which dwarfs any warrantless searches (or wiretaps) that have been conducted by the Bush Administration on known or suspected terrorists operating in the country.

And all of this personal information would be obtained by the FBI with no warrant or judicial or Congressional oversight whatsoever!!!

How is it that spying on terrorists is bad, but spying on honest gun owners is good?

Again, I hope that you will oppose HR 297. Gun Owners of America will continue to keep me informed on the progress of this bill. Thank you.


Labels: , ,


RE: Dennis Kucinich: Supports U.N. Charter-Not US Constitution

----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
From: Leo/FightNWO-Resisting World Government
Date: Apr 28, 2007 3:19 PM

----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
Date: Apr 28, 2007 12:12 PM

April 28, 2007

Kucinich sticks his foot in his mouth once again. Last week, he stated in Congress (while introducing H.R. 808his intention to bring forth legislation that would ban the ownership of handguns.) Now this week....

This is a video of the 04-27-2007 airing of HBO's "Real-Time with Bill Maher" where Democratic Presidential Candidate, Dennis Kucinich sat down with Bill for about a 10 minute interview (starts at about 5:40.)
It's an eye-opening interview that should rasie a number of red-flags for those out there who still believe in things such as National Sovereignty and the united States Constitution.

Now, I don't want to seem to be the type who will knock a political candidate for office just because I may not agree with their "platform." But Mr. Kucinich has said and done some things that to me, seem a bit off for someone who is supposed to be one of the more honest and as yet uncorrupted politicians.

Anyway, take a look at the interview, and read what follows:

So the first real topic broght up on Mr. Kucinich's platform is what's called (being sold as) "Universal Healthcare." STOP. RED LIGHT SHOULD BE FLASHING. This is basically a plank of the Communist Manifesto, and part of the 45 Goals of Communism of 1958. (

In fact, by delving into the issue of wars, and how they can be solved, we begin just to find out where the Ohio Congessman loyalties lie. Certainly not to the united States Constitution, but to something that is completely unconstitutional, and therefore void by the Constitution: the United Nations Charter.

Examine these quotes:
"Reconnecting with the world community (sound like every other globalist?) STOP. RED LIGHT; The U.N. Charter says... STOP. RED LIGHT; ...if you want to seriously address the problems that exist with the insecurities in the world, you have to do it through uniting the nations of the world. And you know, we already have an organization (extremely criminal by the way)called, the United Nations. STOP. RED LIGHT; ...ought to look at ways of emphazizing human unity" STOP. RED LIGHT. (Humanism, another U.N. funded movement.)

Then Bill tries to get him to agree that the U.N. is "flawed" ...."(this I suppose is Bill's way of playing ball with the U.N. by not outright chastizing them for the scum-sucking criminal trash that they really are) and his retort is a blanket cover-answer: "Well, the United States never paid it's dues.." which made it harder for the U.N to establish any illegal and unlawful foothold over our government structure.

"I see the world as inter-connected and inter-dependent.... I see the world as one." (Sure, it is, but it still sounds like the talk of every other globalist one-worlder out there.) "As President, I'll bring a vision of a world that can actually co-exist peacefully. And then act on that vision to create structures like...[H]aving the United States participate in the International Criminal Courts.... have an enforceable structure of international law." STOP. HUGE RED LIGHT!!!

united States Constitution; Article VI, Clause 2:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any state to the Contrary notwithstanding.

Article 6 of the Constitution stipulates that the Constitution is the "supreme Law of the Land". This provision is construed to mean that when state constitutions, state laws or federal laws are found to conflict with the Constitution, they have no force or effect. The Constitution stands above all other laws, executive acts and regulations, including treaties. In their capacity as law of the United States, the rules of international law and the provisions of international agreements to which the United States is party are subject to the Bill of Rights and other prohibitions, restrictions, and requirements of the Constitution. Thus, international law may not violate the body of rules based on the constitution without the relevant rules being repealed.

Anyone who knows the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights should know that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. International laws, and international courts do not apply, no matter what they claim. The same goes for the Supreme Court. It is the ruling court of the land, not bound by international law or jurisdiction.

So, I just wanted to point out some of these "anomalies" in Mr. Kucinich's platform. It's probably way too early for me to make an observation/hypothesis about it, but it seems for the time-being that Mr. Kucinich is trying to get a lot of feathers riled up by supporting things that oppose all concepts of National Sovereignty, a Constitutional Representative Republic, and the Constitution itself.

Another thing: "The level of violence in our society constitutes a national emergency. I am offering the following approach to change America's direction, away from death and disintegration and towards life and social cohesiveness. First, passage of legislation to create a Cabinet level Department of Peace and Nonviolence, H.R. 808 ; second, passage of H.R. 676 to create Medicare for all, not-for-profit health care system focusing on mental health care issues; and, third, a ban on handguns, legislation which I am currently drafting." (Mr. Kucinich speaking before congress last week.

Cabinet level Department of Peace and Nonviolence: Doesn't this sould like another name for Orwell's Ministry of Peace?

Anyway, just thought I would share this with everyone.

Labels: , ,



----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
Date: Apr 27, 2007 8:59 PM

UFOs in the Bible
UFOs in the Bible part 1/5
Planet X Nibiru anunnaki pluto planets

Sumerian Origin Of Humans

UFOs in the Bible part 2/5

UFOs in the Bible part 3/5

UFOs in the Bible part 4/5

UFOs in the Bible part 5/5


spirits in the sky ufo

UFOs - The Flying Gods

UFO's The Hidden Truth : # 2 Close Encounters With E.T.s

The Nephilim and the Pyramid of the Apocalypse

The Return of the Nephilim


UFO Files - The Grays agenda

Labels: , ,


RE: (Controlled News!) Global sunburn... LOL

----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
From: Nibiru
Date: Apr 27, 2007 8:10 PM

Solar Sunburn

Breaking Solar News

Image: From Northern Oklahoma College Enid Campus Observatory
The dark areas on the sun's surface are new sunspots imaged through an observatory in Enid, Okla.
The Associated Press
Transportation sector grapples with solar flare forecast

WASHINGTON (Apr 26, 2007)
The peak of the next sunspot cycle will come in late 2011 or early 2012, potentially affecting airline flights, communications satellites and electrical transmissions. But forecasters can't agree on how intense it will be

Labels: , ,


RE: Government Keeps a Secret After Studying Spy Agencies

----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
From: Wendy Bird
Date: Apr 27, 2007 6:53 PM

Government Keeps a Secret After Studying Spy Agencies

Article Tools Sponsored By
Published: April 26, 2007

WASHINGTON, April 25 — Concerned about the growing dependence of the nation’s spy agencies on private contractors, top intelligence officials have spent months determining just how many contractors work at the C.I.A., D.I.A., F.B.I., N.S.A. and the rest of the spook alphabet soup.

Now they have an answer. But they cannot reveal it, they say, because America’s enemies might be listening.

Ronald P. Sanders, chief human capital officer for the director of national intelligence, said that because personnel numbers and agency budgets were classified, he could not reveal the contractor count.

“I can’t give you anything that would allow you to impute the size of the I.C. civilian work force,” Mr. Sanders said, using shorthand for “intelligence community” in a telephone briefing that covered everything about the contractor survey except its core findings.

Mr. Sanders said the study did find that about 25 percent of the intelligence work now contracted out resulted from personnel ceilings imposed by Congress. But 25 percent of what, he said he could not disclose.

Steven Aftergood of the Project on Government Secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists, said the decision not to reveal the numbers was a sign of dysfunctional policies.

“It reveals how confused the government is about what is really sensitive and what is not,” Mr. Aftergood said. “What would Osama bin Laden do with the fraction of intelligence workers who are contractors? Absolutely nothing.”

The government’s use of contractors has accelerated greatly during the Bush administration. Nowhere has the increase been more striking than in the spy agencies, like Central Intelligence, Defense Intelligence and National Security, whose budgets were cut sharply in the 1990s and then faced huge new demands after the 2001 terrorist attacks.

Members of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees have expressed concern about the cost of contracting and its impact on agencies in luring away skilled employees. The intelligence director’s office set out last year, as a first step, to get a handle on the scale of contracting.

The agencies have long fought efforts to make public their budgets and work force numbers.

But not all officials have been punctilious about keeping the secrets. At a conference in 2005, Mary Margaret Graham, a deputy director of national intelligence, let slip that the annual spy budget was $44 billion. Last year, John D. Negroponte, then the intelligence director, said in a speech “almost 100,000 patriotic, talented and hard-working Americans” work for the agencies.

Why was Mr. Negroponte permitted to reveal that number? “It was an estimate,” said Ross Feinstein, a spokesman for the current intelligence chief, Mike McConnell.

Asked why no estimate of contractors can be revealed, Mr. Feinstein said in a statement: “Administrations and Congressional majorities of both parties have supported classifying intelligence budgets, personnel and contractor numbers to protect our national security interests.”

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,


Traitors are good, terrorists are bad


----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
From: Wendy Bird
Date: Apr 27, 2007 7:04 PM

REAL CRIMES OF WOLFOWITZ IGNORED: Wolfie’s recent influence peddling scandal nothing compared to history of spying

Fri, 27 Apr 2007 12:12:00

American Free Press (

IT MADE THE NEWS when World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz was caught arranging a sweet deal for his mistress with World Bank funds, but the fact that Wolfowitz was once investigated for spying for a foreign government has kept under wraps by the mass media in America.

Those who make it their business to know about the doings of intriguers such as the big man at the World Bank recognize that Wolfowitz is a traitor who once engaged in espionage on behalf of Israel—and got away with it.

However, the much bigger scandal, dating back to 1978, has never been plastered across the front pages of newspapers or slavered over by grinning media personalities.

While the employees of the World Bank are up in arms and have publicly hissed him and called for his ouster, Wolfowitz is still hanging on at the World Bank with the support of the Israel-controlled Bush administration.

That many are reveling in the scandal surrounding Wolfowitz is not surprising. Not only is Wolfowitz a “neo-con” (that is, one of the famous neo-conservatives) but he is also, as brash commentator Maureen Dowd has noted, a “con,” in the classic sense of the word: a con-man, a crook, evidenced by his influencepeddling on behalf of his mistress. However, in addition, one might suggest, Wolfowitz should also be considered a “con” in another sense of the word: short for “convict”—as in prison convict, which is where Wolfowitz might have ended up if he had been charged with spying for Israel as some federal agents believe he is guilty of having done.

For many years, Wolfowitz has engaged in dubious affairs on behalf of the interests of Israel. Like many others in his circle of friends and political associates, Wolfowitz—both in private life, as a well-paid academic between stints in government, and in government, most lately as number two man in the Defense Department under the unlamented Donald Rumsfeld—was a key player at the highest level in a relentless, wellfunded and carefully orchestrated campaign of lies and disinformation—acting in concert with Israeli intelligence and the Israeli lobby in America—to embroil the United States in the war against Iraq.

Many call Wolfowitz a “war criminal.” At the very least, he’s a liar. But Wolfowitz, as we’ve seen, can also be pondered as a possible traitor—if then-ranking people in our FBI and the Justice Department were to be believed.

Back in 1978, Wolfowitz was under investigation, as an official of the U.S. Arms Control & Disarmament Agency, for having passed a classified U.S. document to an Israeli government official.

The purloined material related to the proposed sale of U.S. weapons to an Arab government, something always of concern to fanatic Israeli loyalists like Wolfowitz, who, although American born, has always placed Israel’s needs first and foremost in his policymaking ventures.

Wolfowitz utilized the good offices of an operative of the pro-Israel lobby, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, as the intermediary in handing over the stolen document to Wolfowitz’s friends in Israel (where, by the way, his sister lives).

It is this same AIPAC that, even now, is in the midst of a nasty criminal spy scandal relating, once again, to the illegal acquisition of classified U.S. defense information. Two former top AIPAC officials will soon stand trial in federal court for their pro-Israel misdeeds. In any event, although Wolfowitz was never prosecuted for espionage, that doesn’t mean that there wasn’t evidence to indict him.

Several long-time close Wolfowitz associates (all now-infamous “neo-conservative” armchair intriguers for Israel)—ranging from Richard Perle to Stephen Bryen to Michael Ledeen to Douglas Feith, who served as Wolfowitz’s deputy in the Defense Department—have all been under FBI scrutiny at one time or another on suspicion of espionage on behalf of Israel.

It often surprises many Americans, who hear in the media that Israel is such a great ally of the United States, to learn that there are good patriotic Americans in the FBI who don’t like the idea of American public officials, like the aforementioned neo-conservatives, passing classified defense material to this dubious ally.

None of these neo-cons was ever indicted. However, in the case of Bryen, one dedicated federal prosecutor (who happened to be Jewish) pushed hard to indict Bryen, only to have the Israeli lobby put pressure on the Reagan administration to force the Justice Department (ruled by a series of notably corrupt and Israeli-influenced attorneys general during the Reagan years) to abandon the Bryen investigation.

Forget about Wolfowitz and his mistress. Don’t forget about Wolfowitz and his spying for Israel.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,


RE: The Climate Mash!..... RIP Bobby "Boris" Pickett

----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
From: Elsewhere's Daughter
Date: Apr 27, 2007 6:45 PM

Labels: , , , ,


RE: Waxman Invites Tenet to Testify

----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
From: The Man Common
Date: Apr 28, 2007 9:06 AM

    Waxman Invites Tenet to Testify

    By Patrick O'Connor
    The Politico

    Go to Original

    House Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.) has invited former CIA Director George Tenet to testify before his committee next month about claims that Iraq sought to buy uranium in Africa.

    Waxman sent a letter to Tenet, in the care of his lawyer, Robert B. Barnett, on Friday asking the former CIA director to appear before his committee to discuss the intelligence data that President Bush cited in his 2003 State of the Union speech to justify the invasion of Iraq.

    "The purpose of the hearing is to learn your views about one of the claims used to justify the war in Iraq - the assertion that Iraq sought to import uranium from Niger - and related issues," Waxman wrote in the letter.

    Earlier this week, the committee voted to authorize a subpoena for Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to compel her to answer questions about these claims, a move that committee Republicans decried as an "overreach."

    Tenet famously claimed that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction in his now infamous "slam dunk" comment that now seems more like a cover-your-butt background leak from some other White House official who was worried the president might be culpable for the pre-war intelligence.

    Tenet now slams the White House back in his new book, "At the Center of the Storm," saying they twisted his quote about the weapons of mass destruction and claiming there was never a "serious debate" leading up to the invasion. According to an Associated Press preview of the book, the former CIA chief has nice things to say about Bush himself, reserving his fire for Cheney.

Labels: , , , , , ,


RE: Stealing from the Poor and Giving to the Rich

----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
From: The Man Common
Date: Apr 28, 2007 9:08 AM

Ramzy Baroud: Stealing from the Poor and Giving to the Rich

The plundering of Iraq's wealth, first by the UN and now by Iraq's new Green Zone czars, is the biggest, most shameful financial-political scandal of our times.

By Ramzy Baroud

04/27/07 "
ICH" -- -- Locating Dartmouth House, where Hans von Sponeck, former UN humanitarian coordinator for Iraq was scheduled to speak in London 18 April, was a challenge. Yet having been lost for an hour in the ever-confusing and expanding city of London was the least of my concerns the moment I slipped quietly into the lecture hall. His statements were shocking, as were his many statistics: Iraq was simply and shamelessly robbed blind during the period of US-championed UN sanctions. Sadly, the robbery and mismanagement continue to this day, but now the figures are much more staggering.

As Mr von Sponeck spoke, I reflected on my lengthy interview with Iraq's former Ambassador to the United Nations Mohamed Al-Duri. Al-Duri, being interviewed for the first time by English-language media since taking up his post at the UN, revealed to me in early 2001, in equally shocking detail, what sanctions had done to his country and people. He claimed that the UN was a key part of the problem. Led by two countries, the US and Britain, the UN Oil for Food Programme and the "humanitarian" mission it established in Iraq was reducing Iraqis to beggary, robbing the country blind and mis-managing funds, whereas the large bulk fuelled UN-related missions and operations, with needy Iraqi families receiving next to nothing. He spoke of the manipulation of Iraq's wealth for political purposes and alleged that the UN was a tool in the hands of the US government, aimed at encouraging widespread popular dissatisfaction with Saddam's government, before the country was dragged into war.

In hindsight, Al-Duri's assessment was very accurate. Promoting his new book, A Different Kind of War, von Sponeck reiterated in essence and substance Al-Duri's claims; the only difference is that von Sponeck was an insider; his numbers and stories impeccable and hardly contestable. It's no wonder that one and a half years after taking up his post in Baghdad, in 1998, he resigned. Even within such an uncongenial bureaucracy like the UN, some people still possess a living conscience; von Sponeck was and remains a man of great qualities.

By March 2003, when American forces invaded Iraq, the UN was generating $64 billion in sales of Iraqi oil, according to von Sponeck. But scandalously, only $28 billion reached the Iraqi people. If distributed evenly, each Iraqi received half a US dollar per day. According to UN figures, an individual living under one dollar per day is classified as living in "abject poverty". Even during the most destructive phases of the war with Iran, Iraq managed to provide relatively high living standards. Its hospitals were neither dilapidated nor did its oil industry lie in ruins. Only after the advent of UN sanctions in 1991 did Iraqis suffer with such appalling magnitude. Alas, the tyranny of Saddam Hussein expanded to become the tyranny of the international community as well.

"Neither the welfare nor sovereignty of the Iraqi people were respected," by the UN and its two main benefactors, asserted von Sponeck. The UN Security Council's "elected 10 or veto-wielding five" had nothing for Iraq but "empty words," and there were "deliberate efforts to make life uncomfortable (for the Iraqis) through the Oil for Food Programme". All efforts to modernise Iraq's oil industry were blocked, said von Sponeck, at the behest of "two governments that blocked all sorts of items," necessary for even basic living -- again, the US and Britain, the same two that invaded and currently occupy Iraq. The logic in all of this is clear; the "pre- emptive" war on Iraq was but an extension of the sanctions regime.

The assessments of Al-Duri and von Sponeck converge, revealing the shameful intents of the US government and its followers many years before the horror of 9/11 polarised public opinion and allowed Washington's political elites, the neoconservatives and contractors, to make their "case for war". But where did the money go, during the sanctions and now, four years after the invasion?

Von Sponeck reports that a large chunk -- 55 per cent of the money generated from Iraq's oil -- went to fund the UN's own inadequate "humanitarian" programmes. Much of the rest was usurped by the UN Compensation Commission, entrusted with handling damages claims made by those allegedly harmed by the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. According to von Sponeck, the Iraqi oil "pie" was so large there was plenty for everyone: Kuwait, Jordan, Turkey, and all the rest. But most ironically, the commission awarded a large sum of money to two Israeli kibbutzim in the occupied Syrian Golan Heights, for allegedly losing some of their income due to the fact that the war damaged the tourism industry in Israel.

The robbery in Iraq hardly discontinued after the "liberation". On the contrary, it intensified beyond belief. The US Government Accountability Office uncovered appalling discrepancies in the US military administration's handling of money: uncountable billions went missing; hundreds of contractors fully paid but the work never done; layer upon layer of shady companies, mercenaries and sub-contractors (Halliburton and its subsidiary Kellogg, Brown & Root but mere illustrations). In partnership with the new rulers of Iraq, these corporations are stealing the wealth of the once prosperous nation, leaving it in shambles.

And now, the Iraqis are facing enormous pressure to approve the Iraqi oil and gas law. The draft bill, according to Iraqi MP Nureddin Al-Hayyali, would give "50 per cent of the Iraqi people's oil wealth to foreign investing oil firms". The nationalisation of the country's oil industry in 1972 is being reversed. The robbery that began in the early 1990s continues unabated. Shameful as it is, Iraq's new rulers are stealing from the poor and giving the spoils to the rich.

Ramzy Baroud is an Author and Journalist. His latest volume: The Second Palestinian Intifada: A Chronicle of a People's Struggle (Pluto Press, London) is available from Amazon and other book vendors.

Labels: ,


RE: Serving British soldier exposes horror of war in 'crazy' Basra

----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
From: The Man Common
Date: Apr 28, 2007 9:09 AM

Serving British soldier exposes horror of war in 'crazy' Basra

[Published: Friday 27, April 2007 - 09:59]

A British soldier has broken ranks within days of returning from Iraq to speak publicly of the horror of his tour of duty there, painting a picture of troops under siege, "sitting ducks" to an increasingly sophisticated insurgency.

"Basra is lost, they are in control now. It's a full-scale riot and the Government are just trying to save face," said Private Paul Barton.

The 27-year-old, who returned from his second tour of Iraq this week along with other members of 1st Battalion, the Staffordshire Regiment, insisted that he remains loyal to the Army despite such public dissent. He said he had already volunteered to go to Afghanistan later this year.

But, he said, he felt strongly that somebody had to speak out: "I want people to see it as it is; not the sugar-coated version."

His public protest is a sign of the groundswell of anger among the troops, and predictions that more will come forward to break the traditional covenant of silent service. Just last month, Pte Steve Baldwin, 22, a soldier in the same regiment, spoke to The Independent about the way he had been "pushed aside" since being injured by a roadside bomb which killed three others during the Staffords' first tour of Iraq in 2005.

And on Monday, Cpl Richard Bradley also chose to air his views on television: "Blokes are dying for no cause at all and blokes are getting injured for no cause at all."

Reacting to Pte Barton's comments, many soldiers on websites appeared stunned but in agreement. One said: "When I arrived back last year, I was utterly depressed by what I had seen out there and the lack of any progress ... any journo sticking a microphone in my grid would have been given enough soundbites to retire on. And I would probably be in the Tower of London.

"I can only imagine that the situation 12 months on is even worse, and it would not surprise me if this is repeated over the coming months by more guys coming back from their third and fourth tours to that midden."

Pte Barton felt so strongly that he telephoned his local paper, the Tamworth Herald, to speak of the "side you don't hear".

The regiment lost one soldier, Pte Johnathon Wysoczan, 21, during its tour, but 33 more were injured. "I was the first one to get to one of the tents after it was hit, where one of my mates was in bed. The top of his head and his hand was blown off. He is now brain damaged.

"We were losing people and didn't have enough to replace them. You hear about the fatalities but not the injuries. We have had four who got shot in the arm, a bloke got blown up twice by roadside bombs and shot in the neck and survived."

Most, he said, endured at least one "lucky escape" during their tour. "I had a grenade chucked at me by practically a five-year-old kid. I had a mortar land a couple of metres from me."

The regiment was based in the Shatt al-Arab hotel base, which was handed over to the Iraqi army on 8 April. Of the 40 tents in the base, just five remained unscathed by the end of the tour, he said. "We were just sitting ducks ... On the last tour we were not mortared very often. This tour, it was two to three times a day. Fifteen mortars and three rockets were fired at us in the first hour we were there."

He added: "Towards the end of January to March, it was like a siege mentality. We were getting mortared every hour of the day. We were constantly being fired at. We basically didn't sleep for six months. You couldn't rest. Psychologically, it wore you down.

"Every patrol we went on we were either shot at or blown up by roadside bombs. It was crazy."

He insisted that the insurgents appeared to be considerably better trained, funded and equipped than had been the case during their first tour of duty.

"Last tour, I never fired my rifle once. This time, I fired 127 rounds on five different occasions. And, in my role [providing medical support], I shouldn't have to fire." He added: "We have overstayed our welcome now. We should speed up the withdrawal. It's a lost battle. We should pull out and call it quits."

Labels: ,


RE: Richard Clark: Put Bush's 'puppy dog' terror theory to sleep

----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
From: The Man Common
Date: Apr 28, 2007 9:12 AM

Put Bush's 'puppy dog' terror theory to sleep


Be Our Guest

Does the President think terrorists are puppy dogs? He keeps saying that terrorists will "follow us home" like lost dogs. This will only happen, however, he says, if we "lose" in Iraq.

The puppy dog theory is the corollary to earlier sloganeering that proved the President had never studied logic: "We are fighting terrorists in Iraq so that we will not have to face them and fight them in the streets of our own cities."

Remarkably, in his attempt to embrace the failed Iraqi adventure even more than the President, Sen. John McCain is now parroting the line. "We lose this war and come home, they'll follow us home," he says.

How is this odd terrorist puppy dog behavior supposed to work? The President must believe that terrorists are playing by some odd rules of chivalry. Would this be the "only one slaughter ground at a time" rule of terrorism?

Of course, nothing about our being "over there" in any way prevents terrorists from coming here. Quite the opposite, the evidence is overwhelming that our presence provides motivation for people throughout the Arab world to become anti-American terrorists.

Some 100,000 Iraqis, probably more, have been killed since our invasion. They have parents, children, cousins and fellow tribal clan members who have pledged revenge no matter how long it takes. For many, that revenge is focused on America.

At the same time, investing time, energy and resources in Iraq takes our eye off two far more urgent tasks at hand: one, guarding the homeland against terrorism much better than the pork-dispensing Department of Homeland Security currently does the job; and two, systematically dismantling Al Qaeda all over the world, from Canada to Asia to Africa. On both these fronts, the Bush administration's focus is sorely lacking.

Yet in the fantasyland of illogic in which the President dwells, shaped by slogans devised by spin doctors, America can "win" in Iraq. Then, we are to believe, the terrorists will be so demoralized that they will recant their beliefs and cease their terrorist ways.

In the real world, by choosing unnecessarily to go into Iraq, Bush not only diverted efforts from delivering a death blow to Al Qaeda, he gave that movement both a second chance and the best recruiting tool possible.

U.S. military raids in Iraq have uncovered evidence that Iraqis are planning attacks in America, perhaps to be carried out by terrorists with European Union passports that require no U.S. visas. But such attacks here over the next several years are likely now no matter what happens next in Iraq - and that is because of what Bush has already done, not because of any future course we choose in Iraq.

But we can be sure that when the next attacks come in the U.S., if Bush is down on the ranch cutting trees, he and whatever few followers he retains by then will blame his successor. You can almost hear them now: If only hissuccessor had left enough U.S. troops in the Iraqi shooting gallery to satisfy the blood lust of the enemy, as Bush did, then they wouldn't have come here.

The truth: If not for this administration's reckless steps to push America into war - and strategic blunder after strategic blunder that has satisfied the blood lust of the enemy - fewer evildoers would follow us home like the dogs that they are.

Clarke served as chief counterterrorism adviser on the U.S. National Security Council under Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. He is now chairman of Good Harbor Consulting.

Labels: ,


RE: Oil companies bow to Venezuela's demands for state control

----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
From: The Man Common
Date: Apr 28, 2007 9:23 AM

Oil companies bow to Venezuela's demands for state control

Go To Original
CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) -- Four major oil companies on Wednesday agreed to cede control of Venezuela's last remaining privately run oil projects to President Hugo Chavez's government, but ConocoPhillips resisted, prompting warnings that its fields could be taken over outright.

Markets have waited to see if the companies, which pump and process heavy oil in the Orinoco River basin, would remain as minority partners after Chavez decreed last month that their fields be nationalized on May 1. The four projects are considered Venezuela's most lucrative.

Officials from Chevron, BP PLC, France's Total SA and Norway's Statoil ASA signed memorandums of understanding Wednesday agreeing to give state oil company Petroleos de Venezuela SA a majority stake in three of the projects. Exxon Mobil Corp. signed earlier in private, officials said.

"ConocoPhillips has not signed," Venezuelan Energy Minister Rafael Ramirez said at the ceremony.

Houston-based ConocoPhillips is the most exposed: it is involved in two of the four projects, Ameriven and Petrozuata, and has the single largest stake of any company -- a 50.1 percent interest in Petrozuata.

Ramirez said if ConocoPhillips does not sign by May 1, the state will take control of its two projects, but added that Venezuela remains open to dialogue.

"I think (ConocoPhillips) is willing" to sign eventually, Ramirez told reporters.

ConocoPhillips spokesman Charlie Rowton told The Associated Press that discussions were ongoing.

Wednesday's signing ceremony also included agreements giving the state control over some smaller projects outside of the Orinoco: Exxon Mobil's La Ceiba oil field and the Gulf of Paria East offshore oil field that Chinese company Sinopec plans to develop, according to Ramirez.

Ramirez said Italian oil company Eni SpA also did not sign, which raises questions about plans to develop the Corocoro offshore oil field, where it has partnered with ConocoPhillips. Eni had another oil field seized by Venezuela last year. The companies in the Orinoco have until June 26 to negotiate terms of the takeover, including compensation, their new stakes and operational control for the projects, which they have run independently until now. The companies have more than $17 billion in investments and loans in the projects.

Chavez has said PDVSA will take a minimum 60 percent stake that he will send soldiers with government officials to take control of the projects on May 1.

"It's going to be a day of celebration," Ramirez said after the signing ceremony.

Ramirez said the agreements are key to moving toward a nationalized oil industry. Chavez's government has made clear that it still welcomes private investment in oil projects, and until now most oil companies have appeared willing to adjust to the new, tougher terms.

"Every company has to decide for itself," Ali Moshiri, head of Chevron's Latin American operations, said when asked if ConocoPhillips had informed Chevron of why it had yet to sign. ConocoPhillips and Chevron are partners in Ameriven, holding 40 percent and 30 percent stakes respectively. PDVSA has the remaining 30 percent.

The projects upgrade heavy, tar-like crude into more marketable oils and are considered Venezuela's most promising. As older fields elsewhere go into decline, development of the Orinoco is seen as key to Venezuela's future production.

Labels: ,


RE: The militarization of neuroscience

----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
From: The Man Common
Date: Apr 28, 2007 9:28 AM

The militarization of neuroscience

We've seen this story before: The Pentagon takes an interest in a rapidly changing area of scientific knowledge, and the world is forever changed. And not for the better.

During World War II, the scientific field was atomic physics. Afraid that the Nazis were working on an atomic bomb, the U.S. government mounted its own crash project to get there first. The Manhattan Project was so secret that Congress did not know what it was funding and Vice President Harry S. Truman did not learn about it until FDR's death made him president. In this situation of extreme secrecy, there was almost no ethical or political debate about the Bomb before it was dropped on two cities by a bureaucratic apparatus on autopilot.

Despite J. Robert Oppenheimer's objections, a few Manhattan Project scientists organized a discussion on the implications of the "Gadget" for civilization shortly before the bomb was tested. Another handful issued the Franck Report, advising against dropping the bomb on cities without a prior demonstration and warning of the dangers of an atomic arms race. Neither initiative had any discernible effect. We ended up in a world where the United States had two incinerated cities on its conscience, and its pursuit of nuclear dominance created a world of nuclear overkill and mutually assured destruction.

This time we have a chance to do better. The science in question now is not physics, but neuroscience, and the question is whether we can control its militarization.

According to Jonathan Moreno's fascinating and frightening new book, Mind Wars: Brain Research and National Defense (Dana Press 2006), the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency has been funding research in the following areas:

  • Mind-machine interfaces ("neural prosthetics") that will enable pilots and soldiers to control high-tech weapons by thought alone.
  • "Living robots" whose movements could be controlled via brain implants. This technology has already been tested successfully on "roborats" and could lead to animals remotely directed for mine clearance, or even to remotely controlled soldiers.
  • "Cognitive feedback helmets" that allow remote monitoring of soldiers' mental state.
  • MRI technologies ("brain fingerprinting") for use in interrogation or airport screening for terrorists. Quite apart from questions about their error rate, such technologies would raise the issue of whether involuntary brain scans violate the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
  • Pulse weapons or other neurodisruptors that play havoc with enemy soldiers' thought processes.
  • "Neuroweapons" that use biological agents to excite the release of neurotoxins. (The Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention bans the stockpiling of such weapons for offensive purposes, but not "defensive" research into their mechanisms of action.)
  • New drugs that would enable soldiers to go without sleep for days, to excise traumatic memories, to suppress fear, or to repress psychological inhibitions against killing.

Moreno's book is important since there has been little discussion about the ethical implications of such research, and the science is at an early enough stage that it might yet be redirected in response to public discussion.

If left on autopilot, however, it's not hard to see where all of this will lead. During the Cold War, misplaced fears of a missile gap and a mind control gap excited an overbuilding of nuclear weapons and unethical LSD experiments on involuntary human subjects. Similarly, we can anticipate future fears of a "neuroweapons" gap, and these fears will justify a headlong rush into research (quite likely to involve unethical human experiments) that will only stimulate our enemies to follow suit.

The military and scientific leaders chartering neuroweapons research will argue that the United States is a uniquely noble country that can be trusted with such technologies, while other countries (except for a few allies) cannot. They will also argue that these technologies will save lives and that U.S. ingenuity will enable the United States to dominate other countries in a neuroweapons race. When it is too late to turn back the clock, they will profess amazement that other countries caught up so quickly and that an initiative intended to ensure American dominance instead led to a world where everyone is threatened by chemicalized soldiers and roboterrorists straight out of Blade Runner.

Meanwhile, individual scientists will tell themselves that, if they don't do the research, someone else will. Research funding will be sufficiently dominated by military grant makers that it will cause some scientists to choose between accepting military funding or giving up their chosen field of research. And the very real dual-use potential of these new technologies (the same brain implant can create a robosoldier or rehabilitate a Parkinson's disease sufferer) will allow scientists to tell themselves that they are "really" working on health technologies to improve the human lot, and the funding just happens to come from the Pentagon.

Does it have to be this way? In spite of obvious problems controlling a field of research that is much less capital-intensive and susceptible to international verification regimes than nuclear weapons research, it is possible that a sustained international conversation between neuroscientists, ethicists, and security specialists could avert the dystopian future sketched out above.

Unfortunately, however, Moreno (p.163) quotes Michael Moodie, a former director of the Chemical and Biological Arms Control Institute, as saying, "The attitudes of those working in the life sciences contrast sharply with the nuclear community. Physicists since the beginning of the nuclear age, including Albert Einstein, understood the dangers of atomic power, and the need to participate actively in managing these risks. The life sciences sectors lag in this regard. Many neglect thinking about the potential risks of their work."

Time to start talking!

Labels: ,


RE: Dollar Declines to All-Time Low Against Euro as Economy Slow

----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
From: The Man Common
Date: Apr 28, 2007 9:33 AM

Dollar Declines to All-Time Low Against Euro as Economy Slows

By Min Zeng and Bo Nielsen

Go To Original

April 27 (Bloomberg) -- The dollar dropped to an all-time low against the euro after the U.S. government reported the economy grew at its slowest pace in four years.

The dollar also weakened against most other major currencies, with a Federal Reserve index measuring dollar strength near the lowest level in its 36-year history. Hedge funds and other speculative investors increased bets on the euro's gain to a record for a third straight week.

``The main trend is averse to the dollar,'' said Paul A. Samuelson, professor emeritus of economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a Nobel Prize winner in economics. ``With the U.S. in moderate slowdown, that's not encouraging foreign savers at the old dollar exchange rate.''

The dollar dropped as low as $1.3681 per euro today, eclipsing the previous record of $1.3666, touched April 25 and first reached Dec. 30, 2004. The euro debuted in January 1999 at about $1.17. The dollar traded at $1.3654 at 4:34 p.m. in New York.

U.S. gross domestic product, the sum of all goods and services produced, grew at an annual rate of 1.3 percent from January through March after a 2.5 percent pace in the fourth quarter, the Commerce Department reported in Washington today.

The dollar has fallen 16 percent against the euro since the European currency's 1999 launch. The dollar has declined 20 percent versus the pound, 36 percent against the Australian currency, 40 percent versus the New Zealand currency and 38 percent against its Canadian counterpart over the same period.

The Federal Reserve's U.S. Trade Weighted Major Currency Dollar Index comparing the dollar with other major currencies dropped to an all-time low of 78.99 on April 25 and is down 1.8 percent this year.

Current-Account Deficit

The current account, a broad definition of trade that includes investment income and transfers, fell to a record deficit of $856.7 billion last year.

``The current account has weakened the dollar for some time, while interest rates supported it,'' said Torsten Slok, an economist in New York at Deutsche Bank AG. ``If rates start to fall relative to other areas, both indicators will point down for the dollar.''

Slok and his colleagues expect the Federal Reserve will lower its target rate for overnight lending between banks to 4.75 percent this year and the dollar will remain weak at $1.36 by the end of the year.

The U.S. currency pared its decline as investors bought back the dollar to limit their losses, said Brian Dolan, research director at, a unit of online currency trader Gain Capital in Bedminster, New Jersey.

Bets on Euro

Futures traders increased bets on the euro's gain against the dollar to a record high for a third week, the Washington- based Commodity Futures Trading Commission reported today.

The difference in the number of wagers by hedge funds and other large speculators on an advance in the euro compared with those on a drop -- so-called net longs -- rose 4 percent to 111,282 on April 24, replacing the previous high of 106,770 a week earlier.

The dollar traded at 119.53 yen, rebounding from a low of 118.88 after the Commerce Department released its economic data.

The yen dropped to a record low against the euro after a Japanese government report showed consumer prices dropped last month and the Bank of Japan lowered its forecast for inflation for the 2007-2008 fiscal year.

BOJ Outlook

Investors speculated the BOJ will refrain from boosting interest rates at a faster pace, spurring buying of higher- yielding assets funded by loans in Japan, a practice known as the carry trade. The BOJ kept its benchmark rate unchanged at 0.5 percent, the lowest among major economies.

The Japanese currency fell 0.38 percent to 163.20 per euro and earlier touched an all-time low of 163.24.

A declining dollar is benefiting U.S. companies such as McDonald's Corp., EBay Inc. and 3M Co., whose overseas revenue has increased when expressed in dollar terms.

The U.S. government's views on the currency haven't changed since Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson reiterated his support for a ``strong dollar'' on April 20, said Brookly McLaughlin, Paulson's spokeswoman in Washington.

European Central Bank council member Yves Mersch told the Boersen-Zeitung newspaper on April 25 that German exporters ``can live with the current exchange rate'' and that in a ``monetary union internal adjustment processes are more important than'' external ones.

U.S. Versus Europe

The 13-country euro region's economy grew 2.7 percent last year, the fastest in six years. The region will expand 2.3 percent this year, compared with growth of 2.2 percent in the U.S., according to the International Monetary Fund.

The Fed has held its target rate for overnight lending between banks at 5.25 percent since June, while the European Central Bank raised its benchmark a quarter percentage point to 3.75 percent last month.

To contact the reporters on this story: Min Zeng in New York at ; Bo Nielsen in New York at .

Labels: ,


RE: Mass Amnesia Makes Americans Forget the Story Behind May Day

----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
From: The Man Common
Date: Apr 28, 2007 9:34 AM

    Mass Amnesia Makes Americans Forget the Story Behind May Day

    By Rudolph J. Vecoli
    The Times Argus

    Go to Original

    May Day: The holiday of the workers. In days gone by, when men, women and children often worked 10 or more hours a day, seven days a week, May Day was an assertion on the part of wage-slaves that they were sovereign human beings with control over their own lives and destinies. They celebrated the day with marches of tens and hundreds of thousands throughout the world.

    May Day was an expression of the international solidarity of the working class. "Workers of the world unite, you have nothing to lose but your chains," was not just a slogan. It was a battle cry in the war between classes. Their marches and rallies, with fiery speeches, impassioned poetry and stirring anthems, gave them a sense of their collective strength. It was an act of defiance of the combined forces of employers and public authorities. Often their gatherings were brutally attacked by police or thugs with clubs and guns.

    Many of us have grandparents or great-grandparents who participated in these observances. Few of us acknowledge or are even aware of this inspiring part of our family histories. We Americans suffer from mass amnesia of the remarkable and some times glorious history of workers' struggles for liberty of expression and social justice. Who now remembers May Day?

    Although not often taught in American history classes, May Day originated in the United States during the campaign for an eight-hour day. The Knights of Labor, the nascent American Federation of Labor and various anarchist groups designated May 1, 1886, for nationwide demonstrations for the eight-hour goal. An incident which occurred several days later in Chicago made this the beginning of a global workers' movement. Following a clash between strikers and police in which several workers were killed, a protest meeting was held in Haymarket Square.

    When police attacked the gathering, a bomb was thrown, killing several officers. In the trial of anarchists (who were not accused of the bombing, but for advocating violence) which followed, eight were found guilty and four subsequently executed. These "Haymarket martyrs" quickly became revered heroes of labor movements throughout the world.

    With this tragic episode in the class war in mind, the International Socialist Congress meeting in Paris in 1889 designated May 1, 1890, as an eight-hour holiday to be observed by workers in all countries. An increasingly conservative Samuel Gompers and AF of L had by the mid-1890s distanced themselves from May Day and embraced the legally sanctioned Labor Day, which was observed the first Monday in September. Coming from radical backgrounds, Finns, Slavs, East European Jews, Italians and other immigrants found their cherished May Day opposed not only by capitalists but often by American workers as well. Despite being denounced as "foreign born reds," they kept the torch of May Day idealism burning for another generation.

    The response of the "bosses," political and economic, was twofold: to allay the anger of the workers, measures were taken to ameliorate the worst abuses of the capitalist system; while extreme repression was used to silence the most vocal and active labor advocates. The case of Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti, two Italian anarchist immigrants, electrocuted on Aug. 23, 1927, following a blatantly biased trial, is the most heinous example of the latter.

    However, the ideal of May Day had already been shattered by the collision of international solidarity of the "proletariat" with the fervid nationalism resulting from World War I. Patriotism trumped class consciousness, and millions of workers killed each other in the name of the fatherland. Meanwhile, the Bolshevik Revolution which appeared to fulfill the vision of a collective republic turned out to be a Trojan horse in the socialist camp. The Leninist-Stalinist regime proved to be a ruthless dictatorship presiding over state capitalism. Among the earliest and most passionate opponents of Communist Russia were socialists and anarchists whose comrades were being liquidated by the Bolsheviks.

    The aspiration for the unity of workers was shattered by these developments.

    In the United States, the Great Depression of the 1930s did not usher in communism but the New Deal of Franklin D. Roosevelt, which saved capitalism and laid the basis for a welfare state.

    May Day was hijacked by the Soviet Union with its displays of military prowess in Red Square. The association of May Day with Soviet Communism has given it a bad name to this day.

    In this age of globalization, when workers are pitted against each other, across oceans and continents, we have returned to conditions of pitiless exploitation of human beings. If greed ever was constrained by patriotism, it certainly is not today. The quest for profits knows no inhibitions by national ideologies or loyalties. Yes, we are involved in a class war, a war of oil companies, the military-industrial complex, the corrupted political institutions, against the workers and consumers.

    We, the American working people, remain beguiled by symbols, the flag, the Fourth of July, the Thanksgiving turkey. It is time to revisit May Day in the spirit in which it was conceived over a hundred years ago. Only an international labor movement can hope to match the prowess of the amoral trans-national capitalist system. Freeing ourselves from the sordid history which stained the banner of May Day, we need to raise a cleansed, purified standard on which is emblazoned once again: "Workers of the World Unite!"

    Rudolph J. Vecoli is professor emeritus of history and former director of the Immigration History Research Center University of Minnesota-Twin Cities. He lives in St. Paul, Minnesota.

Labels: ,


NY has the best police that money can buy!!!

RE: NY Police Report Bomb to Frame 9.11 Truther

----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
From: Impeach GeOgre/ 9.11 Truth
Date: Apr 28, 2007 9:37 AM

----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
From: Arkansas 9/11 Truth Movement
Date: Apr 28, 2007 6:08 AM

----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
From: Alex Jones
Date: Apr 28, 2007 5:08 AM

NY Police Report Bomb to Frame Activist as Terrorist

Two persons identifying themselves as New York police officers interrupted a 9/11 Truth demonstration on a public sidewalk in front of the new WTC 7 Building to intimidate free speech, stating "Larry [Silverstein] doesn't want to hear it," before accusing We Are Change founder Luke Rudkowski of having a bomb and that his cell phone was "a gun."

Labels: ,


RE: RE: Christians in bull's-eye in new 'hate crimes' plan

----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
From: ♥ Angel ♥ ™
Date: Apr 28, 2007 9:39 AM

Thanks: Diana

Christians in bull's-eye in new 'hate crimes' plan
Congress working to create penalties for non-PC views

Posted: April 26, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2007

A fast-tracked congressional plan to add special protections for homosexuals to federal law would turn "thoughts, feelings, and beliefs" into criminal offenses and put Christians in the bull's-eye, according to opponents.

"H.R. 1592 is a discriminatory measure that criminalizes thoughts, feelings, and beliefs [and] has the potential of interfering with religious liberty and freedom of speech," according to a white paper submitted by Glen Lavy, of the Alliance Defense Fund.

"As James Jacobs and Kimberly Potter observed in Hate Crimes, Criminal Law, and Identity Politics, 'It would appear that the only additional purpose [for enhancing punishment of bias crimes] is to provide extra punishment based on the offender's politically incorrect opinions and viewpoints,'" said Lavy.

The proposal has been endorsed by majority Democrats on the committee, and already has 137 sponsors in the full House, making it possible it could be voted on in a matter of days or weeks.

"This is a terrible thing, to criminalize thought or emotion or even speech," Lavy told WND, referring to H.R. 1592, now pending at the committee level in the U.S. House. Democrats there have been turning back amendments that would strip it of its worst provisions, according to an observer.

Bishop Harry Jackson, chairman of the High Impact Leadership Coalition, said the plan, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Protection Act of 2007, is no more than "a surreptitious attempt by some in Congress to strip the nation of religious freedom and the ability to preach the gospel from our church pulpits."

"It will stamp all over our doctrine and practice of our faith," he said. "We believe what the Bible says. If you start there we've got a major problem."

Secondly, it unfairly restricts the expression of fair opinion by Christians, he told WND. "If anything, gays are getting undue deference awarded to them by the courts. That's why we have the same-sex marriage fight and that kind of thing."

Rev. Louis Sheldon, director of the Traditional Values Coalition, which represents 43,000 churches across the nation, told WND that the Democrats sponsoring and supporting the issue "have sold out to the homosexual agenda."

He said churches need to awaken to the dangers of having pastors, lay leaders, or even those sitting in the pews sent to jail for their biblical views. "When they [realize they] could go to jail for preaching the Word of God, they'll be concerned," he told WND.

Sheldon's organization is releasing a poster showing Jesus as a wanted fugitive, for "crimes" under the planned "hate crimes" legislation.

He also is running an e-mail campaign to alert members of Congress about their constituents' concerns.

WND columnist Janet Folger this week warned in a commentary called "Pastors: Act now or prepare for jail," that in New Hampshire, a crime that typically carries a sentence of 3 1/2 years was "enhanced" to 30 years because a robber shouted an anti-homosexual name at his victim.

"Think about it for a minute. If saying a mean anti-homosexual word adds an additional 23-26 ½ years to a sentence, and people live to around 80, that penalty is one-fourth of your life for the words you say. And while this was in addition to a robbery penalty, how much of a jump would it really be to penalize the speech 'infraction' alone? And just what constitutes an 'anti-gay epithet'? Would an 'anti-gay epithet' be to say, 'Homosexuality is a sin,' or 'Homosexuals should repent'? What if you informed someone that 'Homosexuality is harmful to your health'? If I were you, I wouldn't try it in New Hampshire," Folger wrote.

Folger's organization, Faith2Action, has launched a series of ads about Philadelphia grandmothers who were thrown in jail in Pennsylvania under that state's "hate crimes" law – and faced the possibility of 47 years in jail – for testifying in public about their Christian faith.

Those ads can be viewed at

One, Arlene Elshinnawy, 75, and grandmother of three, was holding a sign: "Truth is hate to those who hate the truth," before she was hauled off by police officers.

The proposal is by U.S. Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., the head of the House Judiciary Committee.

On Sheldon's website, he warned the bottom line is that in a court of law "cross-dressers rights would trump a pastor's right to preach the Bible, if the so-called Hate Crimes bill … passes."

Bishop Jackson cited well-known cases of the application of such a law in other nations: "In Australia, two evangelical pastors were charged with violating the State of Victoria's 'hate crimes' laws last year for criticizing Islam. In Canada, a Catholic city councilor was fined $1,000 for publicly stating that a gay couple's lifestyle was 'not normal and not natural,'" he said.

“As an African American, I have long questioned the attempts of the homosexual community to piggy back on the legislative breakthroughs blacks have achieved in civil rights. This legislation will not just over-protect homosexuals, it will bring the threat of invasive, governmental interference with the doctrines and practice of the Church. As some homosexual activists chant, ‘Stay out of our bedrooms,’ we are here to say, ‘Stay out of our pulpits!’” said Bishop Jackson.

Lavy's white paper, delivered to Congress just a few days ago, pointed out some of the results if the law is adopted. "It provides a federal remedy for a person who is attacked for promoting homosexual relationships, but not for a person who is attacked for encouraging people to stop engaging in homosexual behavior because it is physically and psychologically harmful," he said. "Worse yet, it provides for federal prosecution of a murderer who spews racial epithets at the victim, but not for a cold-blooded killer that is paid to commit the crime."

"There is no justification for this disparate treatment. Violent crimes should be punished regardless of the characteristics of the victim," he said.

"The emotion of hate is an unfortunate reality of the human experience. But it is not a crime unless accompanied by a criminal action – and even then it is the action that is within the police power of the government, not the emotion." he said. "The reality is that 'hate' crime laws are designed to punish people for what they think, feel, or believe."

And even more problematic, he said, is the inclusion of a definition of 'hate crime' from section 280003(a) of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. "There is legitimate concern that once Congress makes any 'hate' crime a federal offense, the categories of crime will expand to include speech that causes someone to 'feel' intimidated, just as they have in other places such as Australia, Canada, and Sweden," he said.

Lavy's analysis noted that in New Jersey already it is a "hate crime" to communicate in a manner likely to cause "annoyance or alarm."

"One would not expect a reasonable person to feel threatened or feel fear of harm as the result of an innocuous communication. Nevertheless, the entire faculty at Ohio State University's Mansfield campus apparently agreed that university librarian Scott Savage was guilty of threatening behavior for a simple statement in 2006. His 'threat'? Recommending four books for freshman reading… The four books were ";The Marketing of Evil," by [WND Managing Editor] David Kupelian, The Professors by David Horowitz, Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis by Bat Ye'or, and It Takes a Family by Sen. Rick Santorum."

The recommendation made three professors feel "unsafe" on campus and the entire faculty voted to file charges of sex discrimination and harassment against Mr. Savage for "anti-gay hate mongering," Lavy wrote. The charges were dismissed later, and Savage now has responded with a lawsuit against several university professors.

But under the proposal, such a recommended list for reading "could be prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney General."

Lavy's evaluation also noted that San Francisco already has stated in a resolution that organizations seeking to minister to those engaged in homosexual behavior "were responsible" for homosexual student Matthew Shepard's death in Wyoming, even though his killers have said they did it for drugs and money.

Under such a new law, advertising its "Love Won Out" conferences, addressing homosexuality, would subject Focus on the Family to federal prosecution, he said.

At William Patterson University in Jew Jersey, a student-employee was formally reprimanded for saying he didn't want to receive promotional e-mails advocating for the lesbian lifestyle, because that sent a message of a "threat," Lavy said.

Furthermore, statistics show that during 2004 there were only 774 actual "hate crimes" recorded, five murders, four rape and the rest assaults – all of which can be prosecuted without special federal laws, he said.

Rev. Ted Pike, of the National Prayer Network, has been especially active in warning Christians of the approaching danger.

"Most persons who are concerned about imminent passage of the federal 'anti-hate' bill don't realize that S. 1105 in the Senate and H.R. 1592 in the House are actually amendments to a federal hate law passed in 1969. During the height of the civil rights movement, 'Title 18, U.S.C., Sec. 245' stipulated that no one could verbally '…attempt to…intimidate' another person (chiefly black) away from enjoyment of their federally protected right to equal employment, public services, housing, voting rights, jury privileges, etc. If the government finds such verbal 'intimidation' in a state and state officials are not enforcing these guarantees, the federal government can invade states' rights in local law enforcement, upholding Title 18," he said.

Now, in 2007, he said, "the present hate bill grants [special rights] to homosexuals, transvestites, and transsexuals."

The proposal would make it "federally indictable to '…attempt to…intimidate' a homosexual from believing that he (even if he has AIDS or hepatitis) has the right to work in a restaurant, be employed as a police officer or summer camp counselor, or has equal rights to housing and employment anywhere he wishes," he said.

"A pastor, Christian broadcaster or publisher who verbally attempts to 'intimidate' homosexuals by describing homosexuality as an abomination (Lev. 18:22) are thus high-profile targets for indictment under this legislation," he said.

He noted that it also would be illegal for a Christian church to discriminate against an applicant as pastor because of his homosexuality or her lesbianism.

He said the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith has been leading the charge for such crime bills for years, and has explained on its website how its campaign already has installed laws at the state level.

Michael Marcavage, director of Repent America, Peter LaBarbera, of Americans for Truth, Brad Dacus, of Pacific Justice Institute, and others already have expressed their alarm.

Labels: ,

eXTReMe Tracker