Nov. 16, 2005

Bush Gang Swore Saddam Was Behind 9/11 In Lawsuit

This is possibly one of the best accounts I've yet read detailing how America has been hijacked for no better rreason than to serve the interests of a small circle of American "warlords" (for lack of a better expression). Read this article, then look at the motives the PNAC exponents; combine this with Wolfowitz and Perles obligations to Zionism..... and every move taken by this administration is explained fully. There is no need to look any further. Mycos~ Bush Gang Swore Saddam Was Behind 9/11 In Lawsuit By Evelyn Pringle 11/16/05 'ICH ' -- -- Much to the dismay of President Bush, Americans can remember all on their own, without any coaching from Democrats, that in the run up to war in Iraq, it was top official from the administration who were making the claim that Saddam was in cahoots with bin Laden and that he was secretly involved to 9/11. "

Concerning the U.S. use of White Phosphorus and their claim that it is legal


Nov. 15, 2005

The Truth About White Phosphorus

Well, I think we'd all be a little further ahead if we could get a straight answer from someone..anyone... about what takes place during a battle when the technique know as "shake and bake" is used. Now, God forbid that anyone around here would jump to any conclusions about whether the Pentagon is capable of lying to us or not, but just to be on the safe side, I figured maybe I'd do some thinking for myself and see if I might be able to make some sense of the situation, based on what is known about the matter. Now I realize I'm not a military man, and that as such I'm not privy to all the 'intel' on WP, but I think that it's safe to say that the substance is notable for at least three characteristics; it is extremely caustic, extremely toxic..... and it burns real bright, making a damn good flare! Using these features as clues, I went about trying to determine what specific stimulus could possibly be derived from WP that could be so motivating as to make whole bunches of "insurgents" obligingly leap out of their trenches so that they could be cut down by our troops in the conventional manner. Bring my considerable intellect to bear on the problem, I went through the possibilities in an orderly manner and came to a rather stunning conclusion. Becuse we know that the Pentagon would never allow it's field commanders to violate any international conventions banning Chemical weapons, we know that the WP couldn't be (well,it could. But it just wouldn't be) used as a toxin. As already noted, it's against the law and besides, I just don't see these Iraqi's who, upon realizing they've been poisoned, all emerging from their trenches to give our boys some Moslem interpretation of the last big scene in Hamlet. I will admit that the horror of such a spectacle may well be cause for forgiveness should our troops mow down the entire lot using the most expedient method at hand, but I just don't think that Iraqis are so well versed on Shakespeare that they can give an impromptu USO performance of that magnitude. So that's not it..... So what that leaves us with is a choice between WP's use as a flare or in its dry, "caustic" form. The only other time causticity has been known to been used in battle was during the seige of a French castle during the campaign to capture the Holy Grail. Deffending the fortress was a lone Frenchman armed with an extremely caustic tongue. During the brief sequence captured by the Python war correspondents, we see a "taunting" so cruel, that it's legacy exists to this day as a ban by all English speakers everywhere on caustic agents of any kind. Of course that leaves us with but one possibility. Moths. Yes...moths. Clearly the use of WP in battle is sufficient to lure battle hardened soldiers out of their trenches even where the most horrific pounding of high explosive shells could not. Iraqi insurgents have a "jumping gene" so to speak which causes them to jump out of their trenches and chase WP flares in the same way a moth is attracted to a lightbulb. As such, there is absolutely nothing for these nasty rumours about using WP as an incendiary weapon to rest on. It is simply not needed. Why would the U.S. risk it's reputation as a moral "giant among nations" by using such prohibited and vile weapons as incendiaries when it is now known that something as simple as a flashlight can be used to lead Iraqi's insurgents out of their trenches and to their deaths. Indeed. Why would they? Mycos

eVoting Flawed : A GAO Review

eVoting Flawed : A GAO Review: "eVoting Flawed : A GAO Review Despite spending untold millions on new voting equipment, the 2004 election had both real and potential error, according to a recent GAO report. Moreover, due to January deadlines and little government guidance for localities, the situation is unlikely to improve for 2006, because local governments are required to have an electronic voting machine at every polling place after 1 Jan 2006, according to ComputerWorld. "

Nov. 13, 2005

Rights and Liberties: The Torture Test

AlterNet: Rights and Liberties: The Torture Test: "Your questions suggest that you really believe that the US went after Hussein because he was a 'bad man' and he threatened the US with WMD's. Then you have the nerve to ask me about N. Korea. N. Korea has a dictator who actually has nuclear weapons. He also has a country full of people who will actually commit mass suicide for their 'Dear Leader', surely the best army one can hope to have if your going to start a nuclear war. So if it's all about the threat to the US from WMD's, where's all the outrage over Kim Jong Il? Or even Iran for that matter? You mentioned the humanitarian disaster of Rwanda, then asked questions about Hussein, as if being a tyrant is some kind of determinant as to whether the US should attack another country. Again, what about Korea? That's a Stalinist modeled dictatorship and there's every reason to believe that the N. Koreans aren't faring much better under Jong Il. We know of slavery in concentration camps for political prisoners, of torture and of the deliberate starvation of hundreds of thousands.... at least. But that Hussein! He's sure a bad man! And you act as though we only now learned about his crimes anyhow. We've known about him, his attack on the Kurds, as well as his chemical weapons since the 80's. Why the importance now? And what about Idi Amin, Taylor, Somoza and a dozens of other dictators who tortured and murdered hundreds of thousands while the US did nothing. Do you really think the US would attack another country based simply on it's human rights record? LOL. Lemme let you in a little secret. The US, and particularly this government considers a person or a countries worth by what they represent in monetary or strategic value to the US. As such, the Sudanese, the Liberians, the Haitians, etc., have no value in such a worldview. And they are all now dying far away from the attention of the US media. But should they have oil, or pose a threatIsrael or the Saudi Royal family and of course the American economy, that's another whole matter. That's why, once Hussein was no longer playing ball by US rules, suddenly the "poor Iraqi's" are on the front pages." And there's Chalabi, ready and willing to tell all these horror stories (many now known to be BS) to the senate and more importantly to the press. To you. And just like the little nurse who stood in front of congress and told how Iraqi soldiers threw babies out of incubators during the Kuwaiti invasion, it was bullshit. That was the daughter of a Kuwaiti ambassador. But you all bought their crap back then, so I can only suppose that they thought you'd buy it a second time. Now.....Can you possibly imagine the level of disdain these people must have for your intelligence? That you'd fall for it twice? But the kick of it is, they're right! You buy everything they send your way, provided it is sufficiently hyped up. Al Qaeda for instance. They pose no threat whatsoever to the border integrity or economy of the US. 9/11 was spectacular and frightening. But that's all it was. Every ill that has befallen the US since that time has been under the direction and orders of the WH. They took your rights away with the Patriot Act. They sent soldiers to Iraq to get killed. They have smeared the name of the US with the torture and lies. Terrorists existed long before al Qaeda and they will always exist as long as people have grievance's with governments. How did we handle them before then? Why all the hyper-ventilating now? Here's the big answer my friend. PNAC. Look it up. Read it. Look at the authors. Then look at who has been brought into this WH as advisers or key officials of one kind or another. Then look at what has taken place during the Bush administration. If you believe that this could all be a coincidence, well...God bless your soul. Your going to need it should you allow these men proceed any further. Mycos