(excerpt)

PLEASE POST WIDELY

Wed., September 14th Time: 7 pm - 10 pm ET Streaming at http://kpftx.org and http://www.thejourneyradio.org

Two years after the invasion of Iraq, British MP George Galloway and journalist Christopher Hitchens will debate the causes and consequences of the Iraq war at Baruch College in New York City. Moderated by Amy Goodman.

George Galloway is Respect party MP for Bethnal Green and Bow in East London. He recently electrified the United States with his appearance at the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations on May 17, when he turned the proceedings into a condemnation of the war in Iraq. CNN's Wolf Blitzer described Galloway's speech in the Senate as "a blistering attack on U.S. senators rarely heard" in Washington. His new book, out in September, is "Mr. Galloway Goes to Washington" (The New Press).

Christopher Hitchens is a widely published polemicist and frequent radio and TV commentator. He is the author of "A Long Short War," "Why Orwell Matters," "The Trial of Henry Kissinger," and many other books. The London Observer calls him "One of the most brilliant journalists of our time."

This debate is part of a national tour of the United States by George Galloway, "Stand Up and Be Counted: No to War and Occupation." The tour will culminate in Washington, DC, during the anti-war protests on September 24th. For a full list of cities and events, please see the website:

http://www.mrgallowaygoestowashington.com/.

For more information on the webcast or to host additional streams, contact StoptheWar Productions: 718 505-1258


Informant: Jimmy

The grim harvest of bloated bodies continued unabated as President George W. Bush began his first tour of the city of New Orleans devastated two weeks ago by Hurricane Katrina.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/091205P.shtml

Rarely in UN history has the United States, the organization's chief sponsor and host, looked as awkward or vulnerable to foreign eyes as it does now. With 170 world leaders meeting in New York this week, the Bush administration is scrambling to save lives and restore its image.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/091205M.shtml

Suspects are denied legal representation, and their detention is concealed from the International Committee of the Red Cross. The most common destination is Egypt, but there is evidence of detainees also being flown to Jordan, Morocco, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan and Syria.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/091205K.shtml

The US Defense Department has written a draft revision of its nuclear operations doctrine that outlines the use of nuclear weapons to pre-empt an enemy's attack with weapons of mass destruction.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/091205I.shtml

http://www.slate.com/id/2125994/nav/tap1/

by Richard Haas, Slate

The calamity of Katrina has exposed Bush's empty rhetoric and strategic dysfunction, harming our foreign policy.

http://www.tompaine.com/

by Patricia Lynn, TomPaine.com

Aggressive lobbying by the junk food industry is a danger to our children's health.

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/20050912/want_some_education_with_those_fries.php

From Media Matters for America

September 6, 2005

Dear Mr. Getler:

I am writing to express my deep concern over the recent use of a dishonest anonymous source by The Washington Post. As you have surely become aware, on September 4, the Post printed an article titled "Many Evacuated, but Thousands Still Waiting; White House Shifts Blame to State and Local Officials." In the article, an anonymous "senior Bush official" sought to dismiss criticism of the administration's response to Hurricane Katrina by contending falsely that "[a]s of Saturday [September 3], [Louisiana Gov. Kathleen] Blanco still had not declared a state of emergency."

The Post was responsible enough to print a correction to the original article, pointing out that, in fact, Blanco declared a state of emergency on Friday, August 26 -- before the hurricane made landfall -- though the correction did not note that the error occurred because the Post relied on a "senior Bush official" who provided false information. Nonetheless, I believe this incident raises serious questions the Post needs to address.

The use of anonymous sources has come under attack from many quarters in recent weeks. We at Media Matters for America are not among those who contend that anonymous sources should never be used. To the contrary, we fully understand that anonymous sources are often vital to uncovering stories that those with power do not want told.

In this case, however, the Post reporter's reliance on an anonymous source defies reason. The statement made by the anonymous source was an assertion of fact that could have been easily refuted.

Blanco's declaration was widely reported at the time it was made, and the New Orleans Times-Picayune reprinted an August 27 letter from Blanco to President Bush in which she noted that she had declared the state of emergency. That the Post allowed itself to be the conduit by which "a senior Bush official" delivered a political attack -- the accuracy of which could have been determined quickly and on the record -- is unconscionable. [...] Read the whole thing at http://mediamatters.org/items/200509060009


© Virginia Metze

by MAX BLUMENTHAL
[posted online on September 7, 2005]
The Nation

Every cloud has a silver lining. Hurricane Katrina has devastated New Orleans, leaving thousands dead and hundreds of thousands homeless, and plunging the entire city into chaos. In the hurricane's wake, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and its director, Michael Brown, forced out of his former job at the International Arabian Horse Association, with no credentials in disaster relief, have become targets of withering criticism. Yet FEMA's relief efforts have brought considerable assistance to at least one man who stands to benefit from Hurricane Katrina perhaps more than any other individual: Pat Robertson.

With the Bush Administration's approval, Robertson's $66 million relief organization, Operation Blessing, has been prominently featured on FEMA's list of charitable groups accepting donations for hurricane relief. Dozens of media outlets, including the New York Times, CNN and the Associated Press, duly reprinted FEMA's list, unwittingly acting as agents soliciting cash for Robertson. "How in the heck did that happen?" Richard Walden, president of the disaster-relief group Operation USA, asked of Operation Blessing's inclusion on FEMA's list. "That gives Pat Robertson millions of extra dollars." [...] Read it all at http://tinyurl.com/7e2wf


© Virginia Metze

A Sneak Preview of the Coming Damage-Control Campaign

by Dr. Teresa Whitehurst

September 6, 2005
Buzzflash.com

"Already, many Americans don't remember Bush's initial halting response to 9/11, from which he recovered after a few days with his iconic moment shouting through a bullhorn atop the rubble at ground zero. Still, recovering politically from Katrina is likely to take more effort. There is no foreign enemy against which to rally." -- For Bush, A Test of Political Skill, 9/6/05

I'm always suspicious when I hear people like Newt Gingrich and other conservatives criticize the Bush administration, because it's nearly always a ploy, a tactic used when overwhelming public discontent threatens to rain on the Bush parade. When the whole nation gets up in arms about something, there's no point trying to justify or excuse one's actions; in fact, that would be a stupid thing to do because it would escalate public anger that's already at the boiling point. A brief mea culpa is in order, quickly followed by a brilliant defensive campaign that the mainstream media will be obliged to support.

To rescue Bush from nation-wide disapproval, one has to be careful. To turn that disapproval onto an expendable scapegoat , or two , one has to be smart. To turn collective fury into positive PR, however, one has to be a genius. That's where Karl Rove comes in. [...] Read it all at http://tinyurl.com/8zxko


© Virginia Metze

Agency draws ire of frustrated volunteers and donors

by Dru Oja Jay
September 06, 2005

The Dominion, Canada's Grassroots Newspaper

In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, several witnesses have alleged that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) turned away volunteers who were ready to help New Orleans residents people trapped in their flooded homes. Other witnesses have said that FEMA turned away offers of aid, prevented water and fuel from reaching people on the ground, and cut emergency communications lines.

The agency has cited security and safety concerns.

On September first, Sheriff's deputies and emergency personnel from Loudon County, Virginia, responded to a request from Jefferson Parrish in Louisiana for aid and set off towards the disaster area on the Gulf Coast. According to the Loudon Times-Mirror, "Sheriff Steve Simpson and his staff spent 12 hours trying to get the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the State of Louisiana Emergency Operations Center to act."

"They didn't, and the 20 deputies and six emergency medical technicians–all volunteers–turned around and came back to Loudoun." Read it all at: http://tinyurl.com/97yre


© Virginia Metze

United States warships turn towards Venezuela as US military takes control of Hurricane devastated regions; Venezuela's Hugo Chavez Frias vows '100-year war'

Published: Monday, September 05, 2005

Bylined to: Sorcha Faal
VHeadline.com
Venezuela's Electronic News

Russian journalist Sorcha Faal writes: Russian Military Analysts are reporting today that a 'significant' portion of the US Navy Armada that had been heading towards their country's devastated southern regions have turned towards South America.

Reports state a planned Invasion of Venezuela to overthrow its President and reassert 'control' over Venezuela's vast oil reserves. [...] Read it all at http://tinyurl.com/dzlpd


© Virginia Metze

By ADAM NAGOURNEY and ANNE E. KORNBLUT

09/05/05

The New York Times
reprinted in Information Clearing House

WASHINGTON, Sept. 4 - Under the command of President Bush's two senior political advisers, the White House rolled out a plan this weekend to contain the political damage from the administration's response to Hurricane Katrina.

It orchestrated visits by cabinet members to the region, leading up to an extraordinary return visit by Mr. Bush planned for Monday, directed administration officials not to respond to attacks from Democrats on the relief efforts, and sought to move the blame for the slow response to Louisiana state officials, according to Republicans familiar with the White House plan.

The effort is being directed by Mr. Bush's chief political adviser, Karl Rove, and his communications director, Dan Bartlett. It began late last week after Congressional Republicans called White House officials to register alarm about what they saw as a feeble response by Mr. Bush to the hurricane, according to Republican Congressional aides. [...] Read it all at http://informationclearinghouse.info/article10130.htm


© Virginia Metze

"He was a man of character and dedication. His departure represents a great loss for the court and for our country." George W. Bush on hearing of the death of Supreme Court Justice William Rehnquist

By Mike Whitney
09/05/05
Information Clearing House

Let's not wring out the tears for William Rehnquist. The man was the worst chief justice to ever serve on the Supreme Court; a complete failure who disgraced his office and the people he was supposed to serve. Never in the 200 year history of the nation has the high court sustained more damage under the stewardship of one man.

Rehnquist's partisan handiwork rigged the 2000 election and set the country in a downward spiral to ruin. He cobbled together the coalition of rogue-jurists who stripped the Florida Supreme Court of their Constitutionally-guaranteed right to decide the outcome of state elections and overturned the fundamental principle of democratic government; the right to have one's vote counted.
Rehnquist invoked the 14th amendment; the "equal protection" clause to elevate his friend George W. Bush to president. Prior to that, the amendment had never even been used in cases other than racial discrimination. Legal scholars and attorneys alike scoffed at the shaky reasoning that held the case together. It was a complete travesty that both Republicans and Democrats disdained. Rehnquist abandoned every principle of judicial impartiality to shoehorn a derelict-Texan into the Oval Office and to uphold his standing as a charter member of the ruling class. [...] Read the rest at http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article10136.htm or http://tinyurl.com/eynww

If you are interested in a history of the Bush family , starting with 1918 and going to the present, you will find one at http://www.hereinreality.com/familyvalues.html
We were still gasping for unpolluted air after statements made by Bush and his NeoCon cronies, when we noticed that Cheney had not surfaced...


© Virginia Metze

ARTICLES FOR BUSH'S IMPEACHMENT (NOT INCLUDING BUSH'S CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE IN THE GULF) - IS THIS ENOUGH TO NAIL HIM?*

The Articles of Impeachment below were wrtitten before Bush's criminal negligence after Hurricance Katrina. Is this enough to take him down? (PS - Be sure to go to ImpeachBush.org and fill out the polls).

If you agree with the articles below, may I suggest you post it everywhere you can today. Pressure Congress. Somebody add in the Gulf criminal negligence articles of impeachment to what's below (written by Ramsey Clark) in proper legalize, and we'll add that to this.

Do we have enough evidence and outrage now to make Congress impeach Bush and Cheney? What do you think?

* Greg Dempsey
* Run with the wild ones


Articles of Impeachment of President George W. Bush

and

Vice President Richard B. Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, and Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors. - - ARTICLE II, SECTION 4 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

President George W. Bush, Vice President Richard B. Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, and Attorney General John David Ashcroft have committed violations and subversions of the Constitution of the United States of America in an attempt to carry out with impunity crimes against peace and humanity and war crimes and deprivations of the civil rights of the people of the United States and other nations, by assuming powers of an imperial executive unaccountable to law and usurping powers of the Congress, the Judiciary and those reserved to the people of the United States, by the following acts:

1) Seizing power to wage wars of aggression in defiance of the U.S. Constitution, the U.N. Charter and the rule of law; carrying out a massive assault on and occupation of Iraq, a country that was not threatening the United States, resulting in the death and maiming of tens of thousands of Iraqis, and hundreds of U.S. G.I.s.

2) Lying to the people of the U.S., to Congress, and to the U.N., providing false and deceptive rationales for war.

3) Authorizing, ordering and condoning direct attacks on civilians, civilian facilities and locations where civilian casualties were unavoidable.

4) Threatening the independence and sovereignty of Iraq by belligerently changing its government by force and assaulting Iraq in a war of aggression.

4) Authorizing, ordering and condoning assassinations, summary executions, kidnappings, secret and other illegal detentions of individuals, torture and physical and psychological coercion of prisoners to obtain false statements concerning acts and intentions of governments and individuals and violating within the United States, and by authorizing U.S. forces and agents elsewhere, the rights of individuals under the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

5) Making, ordering and condoning false statements and propaganda about the conduct of foreign governments and individuals and acts by U.S. government personnel; manipulating the media and foreign governments with false information; concealing information vital to public discussion and informed judgment concerning acts, intentions and possession, or efforts to obtain weapons of mass destruction in order to falsely create a climate of fear and destroy opposition to U.S. wars of aggression and first strike attacks.

6) Violations and subversions of the Charter of the United Nations and international law, both a part of the "Supreme Law of the land" under Article VI, paragraph 2, of the Constitution, in an attempt to commit with impunity crimes against peace and humanity and war crimes in wars and threats of aggression against Afghanistan, Iraq and others and usurping powers of the United Nations and the peoples of its nations by bribery, coercion and other corrupt acts and by rejecting treaties, committing treaty violations, and frustrating compliance with treaties in order to destroy any means by which international law and institutions can prevent, affect, or adjudicate the exercise of U.S. military and economic power against the international community.

7) Acting to strip United States citizens of their constitutional and human rights, ordering indefinite detention of citizens, without access to counsel, without charge, and without opportunity to appear before a civil judicial officer to challenge the detention, based solely on the discretionary designation by the Executive of a citizen as an "enemy combatant."

8) Ordering indefinite detention of non-citizens in the United States and elsewhere, and without charge, at the discretionary designation of the Attorney General or the Secretary of Defense.

9) Ordering and authorizing the Attorney General to override judicial orders of release of detainees under INS jurisdiction, even where the judicial officer after full hearing determines a detainee is wrongfully held by the government.

10) Authorizing secret military tribunals and summary execution of persons who are not citizens who are designated solely at the discretion of the Executive who acts as indicting official, prosecutor and as the only avenue of appellate relief.

11) Refusing to provide public disclosure of the identities and locations of persons who have been arrested, detained and imprisoned by the U.S. government in the United States, including in response to Congressional inquiry.

12) Use of secret arrests of persons within the United States and elsewhere and denial of the right to public trials.

13) Authorizing the monitoring of confidential attorney-client privileged communications by the government, even in the absence of a court order and even where an incarcerated person has not been charged with a crime.

14) Ordering and authorizing the seizure of assets of persons in the United States, prior to hearing or trial, for lawful or innocent association with any entity that at the discretionary designation of the Executive has been deemed "terrorist."

15) Institutionalization of racial and religious profiling and authorization of domestic spying by federal law enforcement on persons based on their engagement in noncriminal religious and political activity.

16) Refusal to provide information and records necessary and appropriate for the constitutional right of legislative oversight of executive functions.

17) Rejecting treaties protective of peace and human rights and abrogation of the obligations of the United States under, and withdrawal from, international treaties and obligations without consent of the legislative branch, and including termination of the ABM treaty between the United States and Russia, and rescission of the authorizing signature from the Treaty of Rome which served as the basis for the International Criminal Court.



http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=impeach
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Downing+Street+Memo

On this, the fourth anniversary of 9/11, I'm just curious, how does it feel?

How does it feel to know that the man you elected to lead us after we were attacked went ahead and put a guy in charge of FEMA whose main qualification was that he ran horse shows?

That's right. Horse shows.

I really want to know -- and I ask you this in all sincerity and with all due respect -- how do you feel about the utter contempt Mr. Bush has shown for your safety? C'mon, give me just a moment of honesty. Don't start ranting on about how this disaster in New Orleans was the fault of one of the poorest cities in America. Put aside your hatred of Democrats and liberals and anyone with the last name of Clinton. Just look me in the eye and tell me our President did the right thing after 9/11 by naming a horse show runner as the top man to protect us in case of an emergency or catastrophe.

I want you to put aside your self-affixed label of Republican/conservative/born-again/capitalist/ditto-head/right-winger and just talk to me as an American, on the common ground we both call America.

Are we safer now than before 9/11? When you learn that behind the horse show runner, the #2 and #3 men in charge of emergency preparedness have zero experience in emergency preparedness, do you think we are safer?

When you look at Michael Chertoff, the head of Homeland Security, a man with little experience in national security, do you feel secure?

When men who never served in the military and have never seen young men die in battle send our young people off to war, do you think they know how to conduct a war? Do they know what it means to have your legs blown off for a threat that was never there?

Do you really believe that turning over important government services to private corporations has resulted in better services for the people?

Why do you hate our federal government so much? You have voted for politicians for the past 25 years whose main goal has been to de-fund the federal government. Do you think that cutting federal programs like FEMA and the Army Corps of Engineers has been good or bad for America? GOOD OR BAD?

With the nation's debt at an all-time high, do you think tax cuts for the rich are still a good idea? Will you give yours back so hundreds of thousands of homeless in New Orleans can have a home?

Do you believe in Jesus? Really? Didn't he say that we would be judged by how we treat the least among us? Hurricane Katrina came in and blew off the facade that we were a nation with liberty and justice for all. The wind howled and the water rose and what was revealed was that the poor in America shall be left to suffer and die while the President of the United States fiddles and tells them to eat cake.

That's not a joke. The day the hurricane hit and the levees broke, Mr. Bush, John McCain and their rich pals were stuffing themselves with cake. A full day after the levees broke (the same levees whose repair funding he had cut), Mr. Bush was playing a guitar some country singer gave him. All this while New Orleans sank under water.

It would take ANOTHER day before the President would do a flyover in his jumbo jet, peeking out the widow at the misery 2500 feet below him as he flew back to his second home in DC. It would then be TWO MORE DAYS before a trickle of federal aid and troops would arrive. This was no seven minutes in a sitting trance while children read "My Pet Goat" to him. This was FOUR DAYS of doing nothing other than saying "Brownie (FEMA director Michael Brown), you're doing a heck of a job!"

My Republican friends, does it bother you that we are the laughing stock of the world?

And on this sacred day of remembrance, do you think we honor or shame those who died on 9/11/01? If we learned nothing and find ourselves today every bit as vulnerable and unprepared as we were on that bright sunny morning, then did the 3,000 die in vain?

Our vulnerability is not just about dealing with terrorists or natural disasters. We are vulnerable and unsafe because we allow one in eight Americans to live in horrible poverty. We accept an education system where one in six children never graduate and most of those who do can't string a coherent sentence together. The middle class can't pay the mortgage or the hospital bills and 45 million have no health coverage whatsoever.

Are we safe? Do you really feel safe? You can only move so far out and build so many gated communities before the fruit of what you've sown will be crashing through your walls and demanding retribution. Do you really want to wait until that happens? Or is it your hope that if they are left alone long enough to soil themselves and shoot themselves and drown in the filth that fills the street that maybe the problem will somehow go away?

I know you know better. You gave the country and the world a man who wasn't up for the job and all he does is hire people who aren't up for the job. You did this to us, to the world, to the people of New Orleans. Please fix it. Bush is yours. And you know, for our peace and safety and security, this has to be fixed. What do you propose?

I have an idea, and it isn't a horse show.

Yours,

Michael Moore
http://www.michaelmoore.com
mmflint@aol.com


Informant: sash

-------

Bernard Weiner: "Do you get it now?" : Commander-In-Thief

Commander-In-Thief Bernard Weiner: 'To those who voted for Bush: Do you get it now?' Posted on Thursday, September 08 @ 09:34:55 EDT By Bernard Weiner, The Crisis Papers

Here's something I don't understand. The Golden Goose was about to lay another 9/11-type Golden Egg for Bush&Company to pick up. And they didn't.

Surely, Karl Rove, who had seen Bush's approval ratings drop to all-time lows, knew days ahead that a Category 5 Hurricane was bearing down on New Orleans and a calamitous disaster was likely to unfold there if and when the levees were unable to hold back the water. What better way to improve those ratings than for Bush to be photographed the day after the disaster struck, standing on top of debris, bullhorn in hand, vowing that the government would help Gulf Coast states rebuild from the Katrina catastrophe?

But none of that happened. They bungled their own political resurrection! Nearly a full week went by, while thousands were dying and starving or were kenneled in unbelievable filth in New Orleans. Nobody seemed to be in charge. Bush remained "on vacation" in Crawford, and traveled around to fundraisers, played golf, etc.; Condi was theatergoing and buying thousand-dollar shoes on Fifth Avenue. What was going on? Did Karl Rove not understand the significance of what was happening? Was Bush...uh..."incapacitated"? What about Cheney, "on vacation" in Wyoming; was he "incapacitated," too? Are the Bush people really that politically obtuse?

So here's the question I have for those of you who voted for Bush in 2004: Do you get it now?

BUSH GOES AWOL, AGAIN

For the past four years, progressives and moderate-conservatives have been pointing out how incompetent this Administration is. Many Bush Republicans accused us of making up such accusations for purely political reasons. Now you yourself can see what we have seen: These guys are way over their heads and haven't got a clue; they're constantly having to come back at a problem in hopes of getting it right the second or third time around. Of course, that means they're always playing catch-up, which means they're always too late. (Such as this Alice-in-Wonderland comment by Bush a week after he went AWOL -- again -- when his country needed him: "In America, we do not abandon our fellow citizens in their hour of need.")

Those at the royal Bush court lead such isolated, circumscribed lives that when a disaster strikes, they are so far removed from the circumstances in which regular people find themselves that they simply don't understand the magnitude of what's happening out there in the real-world. You may remember that Bush's first response to the Asian tsunami was silence, and then a grudging piddling amount of aid offered; it took the international community shaming him for his unfeeling miserliness before his handlers began to change Bush's tune and he finally pledged genuine aid commensurate with the enormity of the catastrophe.

Our earlier assessment of the Administration as bumblers was made mainly on the disaster that Bush&Company made, and are still making, in the Persian Gulf. But now the whole world gets to see, up close and personal, the thorough botch they made, and are still making, in the other Gulf, in New Orleans and environs.

THE IRAQ BOTCH

In Iraq, they launched a war based on lies and deceptions, and had no plan for what should happen after the major military fighting ceased.

They turned away Iraqis from participating in the reconstruction of their own society, preferring to award the multi-billion-dollar contracts to huge American firms like Halliburton and Bechtel. They disbanded the Iraqi army, leaving hundreds of thousands of young Iraqi men unemployed and angry. They insultingly refused aid and advice from the United Nations and their former allies, wanting nobody to interfere with their Occupation. They didn't have enough troops, and the correct troops, in place to police the "post-war" phase. They didn't guard the abandoned ammo dumps, and then were surprised when those munitions were used to blow up U.S. soldiers.

They finally, a year or two late, realized that the U.S. was engaged in a guerrilla-style war against nationalist insurgents, along with some foreign jihadists, and started to change their military strategy. But it was too late, and insufficient, to make much of a dent. Now the U.S. is involved in a stalemated, Vietnam-like quagmire, and steady streams of flag-draped caskets make their way back to the U.S., and thousands and thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians continue dying as well.

And still Bush cannot bring himself to answer Cindy Sheehan's simple question: "For what noble cause did my son have to die?"

ASLEEP AT THE WHEEL

Now in 2005, a natural disaster occurred that everyone predicted -- including the government's own emergency-response specialists. Specifically, Homeland Security Department chief Michael Chertoff and FEMA's head Michael Brown were briefed on the consequences of the levees breaking days before Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans. But the Administration's response was non-existent. Or completely beyond belief: Bush actually told Diane Sawyer "I don't think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees." Read your experts' frickin reports, man!

FEMA (the Federal Emergency Management Agency -- which Bush turned into a stripped-down, underfunded subgroup buried in the Homeland Security Department, focusing on anti-terrorism measures rather than on emergency-management -- is led by an bumbling political appointee, Brown, someone with no experience in this field, and it showed; for example, neither he nor Chertoff were aware there were thousands of refugees in the city's Convention Center until Day 5. We ordinary citizens, paying attention to the news reports, knew that three days before they did.

Brown was a buddy of one of Bush's Texas pals, with a history in show-horses. That's the man in charge of FEMA. And, believe it or not, Bush the other day thanked him publicly for doing such a "heck of a job." Oh, by the way, guess which company has been awarded the contract for reconstructing New Orleans? Yep, Cheney's Halliburton.

New Orleans mayor Ray Nagin hit the nail on the head about Bush's belated promise to send 40,000 troops into his city. "Don't tell me 40,000 people are coming here. They're not here. It's too doggone late. Now get off your asses and do something."

Tens of thousands of New Orleans residents -- those mostly too poor to have been able to evacuate the city -- were herded into mass structures like the Superdome and Convention Center, locked inside, and then no government agency provided food, water, medicine, sanitation care, removal of the dead, etc. Those who wanted to leave those horrific shelters and cross over a bridge to dry land were prohibited by armed troops from doing so.

Many of those residents complained that the thousands of citizens there were treated worse than dogs in a kennel. It was a circle out of Dante's Inferno. Indeed, so atrociously were the victims treated in those facilities that even right-wing Fox News reporters Shepard Smith and Geraldo Rivera were appalled on the air, just trying to get viewers to understand the enormity of the hell-on-earth scenes they were witnessing. Rivera was crying and screaming to "let these people walk out of here...just let them leave."
(You've got to see this powerful video of Shepard and Rivera live on air -- reality-TV at its best.)

DON'T BE POOR OR POOR-AND-BLACK

The fact that the great majority of those seeking refuge and rescue were African-American, and that no help came in the first five or six days, spoke volumes about the "compassionate conservatism" supposedly animating Bush's administration. Try to imagine how fast the federal government would have mobilized to reach an upper-class compound filled with thousands of well-do-do white people, with ccess and influence. You get the picture.

Speaking of pictures, two comments:

1. Bush flew into New Orleans to have his picture taken for public-relations purposes. At one location, he spoke at a "food-distribution" point, which disappeared shortly after the photo-op. It was a set! Various other photo ops likewise were organized that were equally as unreal. For more, see "The Potemkin Photo Op".

2. No doubt you've seen the way two virtually identical photos of hurricane survivors were captioned in local newspapers. In one, a white man, up to his chest in water, with some groceries in his hands: "...found food at a local market." In another, same scenario, but a young black man: "...looted food from a supermarket." Both were trying to survive and bring some form of sustenance back to their children and families. One "found" food, the other "looted" food.

Interestingly, when after Baghdad fell, we saw the video pictures of Iraqis looting stores and museums and such, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld said: "Freedom's untidy, and free people are free to make mistakes and commit crimes and do bad things". . . Looting, he added, was not uncommon for countries that experience significant social upheaval. "Stuff happens."

Now the governor of Louisiana is talking about "shoot-to-kill" orders against those who, facing starvation from a non-caring government, are taking food from abandoned, flooded-out grocery stores. And right-wing, let-them-eat-cake pundits blame the mostly black, poverty-stricken residents for "choosing" not to evacuate New Orleans, as if these cashless folks should just have jumped in their non-existent cars or boats and headed out of town. Of course, FEMA or the military could have supplied the buses and trucks and trains to take out the trapped, but apparently there were no such contingency plans and/or nobody with any brains was in charge to get the mass evacuation organized.

A REVERSE-MIDAS TOUCH

But let's move on from America's perennial, always-just-below-the-surface racism and hits-on-the-poor. The point here is that George W. Bush has a reverse Midas touch. Whatever he involves himself in as a leader winds up in FUBAR land. (If you don't know what those letters stand for, ask someone in the military: ---- Up Beyond All Recognition.)

It happened with his botched oil-company ventures at Arbusto and Harken Energy in Texas; it happened, and is happening in Iraq; and now it's happening with regard to the Katrina disaster in Louisiana.

Except this time there's no wealthy family friend, or Saudi prince, or British prime minister, to bail Bush out of his difficulties. He's out there all by his lonesome, exposed for all the world to see as the emperor with no clothes, a figurehead leader with no emotional or intellectual wherewithal to deal efficiently and correctly with anything beyond the most simple scenarios. Introduce complexity into the equation, and he's a deer in the highlights of reality.

So...what to do? While Rove&Co. ratchet up the ol' spin machine -- and try to find others to blame for their own gross delays and mistakes -- Bush's normal allies are abandoning him, right and left and right. Business Week, Washington Times, newspapers around the country, conservative pundits David Brooks and Newt Gingrich, retired military officers, and so on -- they all can't believe the idiocy and deadly cluelessness of their GOP hero.

They all realize that this incompetent, way-over-his-head guy has three more years on his contract, and he's likely to take down the economy, political structure, and everything else with him as his administration self-destructs in an unholy mess. In short, the Bush Administration is not good for business, which CEOs and others are finally starting to realize.

LEAVE OR BE PUSHED

Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld and Rice and Chertoff and the others simply have got to go, along with the other fools and criminals down there in his bunker. Bush and Cheney either must be encouraged by GOP powerbrokers to resign, or they must be impeached.

They each took a solemn oath to protect and defend the Constitution and all American citizens. They have shredded the Constitution -- in the name of "anti-terrorism," they have denuded the Bill of Rights -- and they have clearly demonstrated that they are incapable of protecting the citizenry, either in Iraq or here at home. Clear dereliction of duty.

Indeed, they have, for their own partisan purposes, revealed the identity of a covert CIA agent -- a crime that according to President George H. W. Bush is "traitorous"; indictments are expected shortly against key Bush Administration officials involved in this case. In addition, the Administration has "disappeared" American citizens into the military gulag, away from contact with lawyers or their families. This is the behavior of dictators; when it happens in African or Latin American countries, we are outraged. Folks, it's happening right here.

You and I, no matter for whom we voted in 2004, need to stop these incompetent fools from doing even more damage, and get this country back on its moral track, run by leaders who have something else on their minds other than power-hunger and take-the-money-and-run.

Bush and Cheney should resign voluntarily right now, in the best interests of the country. If they don't choose to go, it's long past time for impeachment hearings to begin and for local prosecutors and grand juries (perhaps in New Orleans parishes) to start their own investigations and indictments, and not depend solely on Congress for accountability-reckoning. That's the message that needs to go out from all of us, Democrats and Republicans, to our legislators.

I can't express it any better than Aaron Broussard, the president of New Orleans' Jefferson Parish. Here is what he had to say on Meet the Press.

"We have been abandoned by our own country. Hurricane Katrina will go down in history as one of the worst storms ever to hit an American coast. But the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina will go down as one of the worst abandonments of Americans on American soil ever in U.S. history. ? Whoever is at the top of this totem pole, that totem pole needs to be chainsawed off and we've got to start with some new leadership. It's not just Katrina that caused all these deaths in New Orleans here. Bureaucracy has committed murder here in the greater New Orleans area and bureaucracy has to stand trial before Congress now."

Now!

Bernard Weiner has authored more than 150 articles and essays about the Bush Administration since 9/11/01. A Ph.D. in government & international relations, he has taught at various colleges, was a writer/editor with the San Francisco Chronicle for 19 years, and currently co-edits The Crisis Papers http://www.crisispapers.org . To comment, contact crisispapers@comcast.net


Informant: Alan Dicey

http://www.organicconsumers.org/foodsafety/flouride090105.cfm


Informant: NHNE

Lloyd Doggett, U.S. CONGRESS
Friday, September 09, 2005

Our hearts and prayers are with the tens of thousands suffering as a result of Hurricane Katrina and the Bush administration's achingly slow response to its assault.

Last week, President Bush sought to explain the tragedy in New Orleans by saying, "I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees." Later, with tens of thousands still stranded without water, food or medicine, he praised the Federal Emergency Management Agency's director as doing "a heck of a job." With so many Americans mired in hellish conditions, such out-of-touch, self-congratulatory cheerleading is no substitute for leadership.

Now Bush has announced that he personally will lead an investigation of what happened. This sounds too much like his resistance to an independent inquiry into 9/11. It is unacceptable to rely upon him investigating his administration. [..] Read it all at: http://tinyurl.com/b5tur


© Virginia Metze

By Brett Arends
Wednesday, September 7, 2005 - Updated: 04:27 PM EST
Boston Herald

Oil companies came under new fire yesterday when it emerged that ExxonMobil's profits are likely to soar above $10 billion this quarter on the back of the fuel crisis.
That's $110 million a day, and more net income than any company has ever made in a quarter. It's also a stunning 69 percent increase over the same period a year ago and a 34 percent jump from the $7.6 billion Exxon made just last quarter.

``Do you realize President Bush has just given a tax break to ExxonMobil?'' thundered Rep. Ed Markey (D-Malden). ``Of all the companies in the history of the world that needed a tax break, this month, ExxonMobil should be at the bottom of the list.'' [...] Read this at Boston Herald's Business Today section: http://tinyurl.com/brtmd


© Virginia Metze

By ELISABETH BUMILLER
Published: September 10, 2005
The New York Times

WASHINGTON, Sept. 9 - To Democrats, Republicans, local officials and Hurricane Katrina's victims, the question was not why, but what took so long?

Republicans had been pressing the White House for days to fire "Brownie," Michael D. Brown, director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, who had stunned many television viewers in admitting that he did not know until 24 hours after the first news reports that there was a swelling crowd of 25,000 people desperate for food and water at the New Orleans convention center.

Mr. Brown, who was removed from his Gulf Coast duties on Friday, though not from his post as FEMA's chief, is the first casualty of the political furor generated by the government's faltering response to the hurricane. With Democrats and Republicans caustically criticizing the performance of his agency, and with the White House under increasing attack for populating FEMA's top ranks with politically connected officials who lack disaster relief experience, Mr. Brown had become a symbol of President Bush's own hesitant response. [...] Read the rest at: http://tinyurl.com/d2we9


© Virginia Metze

By Dan Froomkin
Special to washingtonpost.com
Friday, September 9, 2005; 1:36 PM

Through thick and thin, President Bush has always maintained the ferocious backing of his Republican base.

Until now?

As I wrote in yesterday's column , partisan squabbles are something the Bush White House has found it can handle just fine, because the base hangs tough. But public outrage over the Hurricane Katrina debacle has the potential to transcend politics as usual. [...] fast forward over poll information

Pollsters, in fact, often look at the gap between two answers as the more telling number. By that reckoning, the gap between Republican approval and disapproval has dropped from 79 to 61 -- or 18 points. [...] Read it all at the Washington Post: http://tinyurl.com/9gx78


© Virginia Metze

We must especially beware of that small group of selfish men who would clip the wings of the American eagle in order to feather their own nests.

-- Franklin Roosevelt, State of the Union speech, January, 1941


Every time I think that Bush and the NeoCons have touched the bottom of the human slime pit, I learn that it has a multiple floor basement. And to make things worse, the judiciary is beginning to be more and more peopled by judges who follow NeoCon or religious dictates instead of the Constitution.

Whenever you hear that we can't do anything about judges, remember this:

1) Judges can be impeached. Perhaps the best basis is a conflict of interest.

2) Congress can remove jurisdiction over a class of law suits or even an individual law suit.

3) Judges must take an oath to uphold the constitution. I don't know if this could be used, but some of the decisions are, as far as I can see, totally unconstitutional.

I used to think that the Congress didn't know anything about point 2, above, until I was reading one of the laws that had some environmental impact, and, lo and behold, the bill contained a clause removing jurisdiction over any law suit that might be filed because of environmental impact. And, of course, this wouldn't be a Democrat law, right? Well, no, the bill had both Democrat and Republican sponsors.

If and when the Republicans lose their fixation on sticking together, they should get together with Democrats and figure out what sort of cases the present Supreme Court is not able to handle properly, and pass a law removing the jurisdiction in such cases.

More regarding judges: Republicans held up judicial appointments that Clinton wanted to make year after year. Then they jump all over the Democrats for trying to keep the far more disastrous NeoCon judges off the courts.

I don't understand why Democrats do not file impeachment articles against Bush. So they might lose. They will have shown they are not just "going along to get along." And many Republicans are waiting to get on the band wagon; naturally they would rather not introduce the articles themselves. Which reminds me... Wasn't the House Republican when Nixon was impeached? Got to remember to look that up.

And now for another problem I have not yet seen mentioned: Will people owning lots and property in New Orleans be able to find their property? And will they be able to prove ownership?

As if we did not have enough to worry about there, everywhere you turn there is another worry waiting to break in.

People in New Orleans are under rule by mercenaries instead of their own national guard. Apparently those are the people who are shooting to kill, breaking down doors of private houses, etc., etc. Tears are not enough; we must end this police state NOW.

If there is any way to add injury to injury, Bush will find it. You can bet your booties the corporations will make out like bandits.


© Virginia Metze



http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=impeach
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Downing+Street+Memo

http://www.WantToKnow.info/050911hurricanekatrinacoverup


Informant: Martin Greenhut


http://disc.server.com/discussion.cgi?id=149495;article=91251;show_parent=1
http://disc.server.com/discussion.cgi?id=149495;article=91253;show_parent=1

by Fiona McRae, Daily Mail - Britain, September 12, 2005
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/health/healthmain.html?in_article_id=362073&in_page_id=1774

Best regards

Olle Johansson, assoc. prof.
The Experimental Dermatology Unit
Department of Neuroscience
Karolinska Institute
171 77 Stockholm
Sweden



Electrical fields can make you sick
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/966487/

by Mike Whitney

When Senate hearings convene this week for Supreme Court candidate John Roberts, let's hope that they focus on the hunger strike taking place at Guantanamo Bay. It was Robert's ruling in Rumsfeld vs. Hamdan that hastened a massive 200-man hunger strike that is now in its second month and has hospitalized at least 15 inmates. The prisoners are demanding that they be given the opportunity to challenge the terms of their detention in a court of law, a principle that Roberts does not support. He ruled in the Hamdan case that the President was not constrained by international law and that "the Geneva Conventions do not create judicially enforceable rights." Roberts ignores the fact that the United States is a signatory of the Geneva Conventions and must comply with its provisions for the humane treatment of prisoners as well as offering prisoners the Convention's protection "until such time as their status has been determined by a competent tribunal." Rumsfeld's handpicked military courts do not meet these requirements, and have been rejected by prominent legal organizations and human rights groups alike....

http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Sept05/Whitney0912.htm

by Phil Rockstroh

An entire American city has become an uninhabitable mire of fetid water, sodden ruins, and toxic sludge. Moreover, the destruction will not end there: the financial, political, and psychological spill-off, incurred by the deluge, will cause our nation to sink further into a morass of debt, denial, and despair. How did it come to this? How did we come to buy this worthless plot of swampland known as George Bush's America? Perhaps, at this point, a brief history lesson, for a nation whose populace possesses the collective capacity for long-term memory of a Louisiana gnat flurry on a hot afternoon in high summer, might prove helpful. Let's begin with the watershed year of 1968....

http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Sept05/Rockstroh0912.htm

by Patricia Goldsmith

Even though the Bush administration is now in full spin-and-smear mode, the truly striking thing about their languorous response to Katrina is how little they disguised their lack of concern for residents of the Gulf Coast. That picture of Bush playing the guitar in San Diego during the magic 72-hour window of opportunity for saving lives just doesn't compute as a lapse in judgment. This administration is nothing if not media- and image-conscious. They do not lose control of the visual. Their slow-walking of aid to Louisiana, the continuing focus on law and order over search and rescue, the alternately stern -- "zero tolerance for lawlessness" -- and forgetful attitudes toward people who were literally dying for want of help: all this was right out in the open. As far as I'm concerned, it reads like a warning. What it says is we are entering a new phase in this rightwing takeover, a phase that is marked, appropriately enough, by a new, glitzier approach to the anniversary of 9/11. While the Bushitters have been shameless in their exploitation of this catastrophe from the first, this year they finally busted out with a real celebration in the form of the so-called Freedom March, culminating in a performance by Clint Black, who sang his pro-war anthem, "I raq and roll." The march's stated purpose is to support our troops, but the obvious intention is to reinforce the false, discredited, and disavowed link between 9/11 and the war in Iraq. What we really need is a Truth March. Wouldn't it be great if we saw a march designed to show the truth about what's been going on?

http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Sept05/Goldsmith0912.htm

by Walter M. Brasch

We recommend that our readers print out this incisive special report and read it in print. The author is an award-winning syndicated columnist, professor of journalism, and a former emergency management official. This article is an in-depth look at the Bush policies that created the atmosphere not only for an ineffective FEMA response during the Katrina catastrophe, but which may have contributed to additional property destruction and deaths than should have occurred....

http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Sept05/Brasch0912.htm

http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/science/09/09/himalayan.glaciers.reut/index.html


Informant: NHNE

The Guardian has learned that Jack Straw, the foreign secretary, has made a personal plea to his American counterpart, Condoleezza Rice, for the US to withdraw opposition to plans for wholesale reform of the UN. He has asked Ms Rice to rein in John Bolton, the US ambassador to the world body.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/091105I.shtml

According to the New York Times, ever since the world learned of the illegal detentions and brutal behavior at American military prisons, the Bush administration has bet it could outlast public outrage with phony investigations and stonewalling.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/091105H.shtml

Journalists covering New Orleans in the aftermath of hurricane Katrina report that militarization in and around the city has hindered their work and threatened their physical safety.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/091105G.shtml

President Bush's job approval has dipped below 40 percent for the first time in the AP-Ipsos poll, reflecting widespread doubts about his handling of gasoline prices and the response to Hurricane Katrina.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/091105F.shtml

Companies with ties to the Bush White House and the former head of FEMA are clinching some of the administration's first disaster relief and reconstruction contracts in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/091105C.shtml

Standing among the wreckage of two national disasters, Joe Conason asserts that it is no longer possible to deny the plain truth: Bush and his administration are unfit to wield power.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/091105B.shtml

William Rivers Pitt: Perhaps now that we have Iraq under our belt, perhaps now that we have Katrina under our belt, perhaps now that we have had a few unspeakably costly lessons on just how wretched, stupid, useless, blind, willfully ignorant, dangerous, petulant, frightening, narrow-minded, foolish and ultimately deranged this administration is, perhaps now we can look at September 11 for what it really was: just another Bush administration failure that came with another massive body count.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/091105A.shtml

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/dekalb/0905/11sheehan.html


Informant: sash



Cindy Sheehan
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Sheehan

http://openpr.com/news/253.html

--------

Mast Sanity Director of Scientific Studies Ingrid Dickenson has now arranged for blood tests to be carried out at a German medical laboratory. This blood test will establish whether a patient is affected by electro magnetic pollution from either power lines, mobile phone masts, mobiles, DECT and other wireless technology and/or environmental pollutants. Blood will be collected through a laboratory in London. In the light of the recent admission by the Health Protection Agency that electro sensitivity is a physical impairement, this blood test will provide the final proof. It is vital that people who believe that they are affected have this blood test. Further details will appear on the Mast Sanity website shortly.

Sian

--------

From: Eileen O'Connor
Subject: Window of Opportunity could be lost -blood tests
Date: Fri, Sep 23, 2005, 8:58 AM

Please see plea from Ingrid below, also enclosed details of the lab, we need people to take the blood test ASAP, this window of opportunity could be lost if we don't get enough people to take the test. We would appreciate any help we can get from the media as we do not have the power or money to advertise. We need to alert as many people as possible.

If you are due to get a mast I would suggest it would be worth having the test before it goes up then a couple of months later, put the industry on notice and inform them that your community will hold them responsible if your blood suddenly starts showing signs of radiation after the introduction of a mast in your community.

Kind Regards Eileen


Message from Ingrid Dickenson

On the matter of the blood tests in the UK, I am very concerned that I might have done all this work for nothing. BioLab has taken on the blood tests for two months only as trial period. If there are not enough people taking it up during that time, I assume the whole thing will fall apart. LaboTech will pick up the first samples Tuesday/Wednesday next week. In order to make it viable for them, they need at least 10 samples, as the courier fees are 200 Euros. We don't have 10 samples yet. All the people who have taken the test (about 8 so far) where friends or patients of mine. The blood cannot be frozen for longer than three weeks. So to keep the blood test running, we need at least 10 people every three weeks, and as the media has not taken up this news, it does not look good. I'm very surprised and disappointed because there are so many people moaning but when it comes to action, only a few come forward. If we loose the test after two months there will be no possibility to get it back and we lost the only chance to prove that there are changes in the blood which cause health effects. I agree that we will not be able to use this as immediate proof. But after a while (only if people come forward to do this test!) we will have the statistics we need to make our case. The other reason for taking this test is of course that the exact supplements can be taken to repair and limit further damage.

Please put the message of the blood test on all your mailing lists and websites and tell your people that it is vital that they take the test up asap. In a couple of months it might no longer be available due to lack of uptake. I've put a lot of time and effort into getting us here and won't be able to do it again. Regards

Ingrid

Here is the registration form for the blood test:

http://www.omega-news.info/anforderungsschein_englisch.pdf

Please get in touch with

Mark Howard Biolab Medical Unit
9 Weymouth Street London W1W 6DB
Tel: (+44) 020-7636 5959/5905
Fax: (+44) 020-7580 3910
Internet: http://www.biolab.co.uk
E-mail: mark@biolab.co.uk

Regards Ingrid

PS Thanks for the info

Please forward and circulate far and wide.

If you love mountains please contact the Governor of Tennessee! phil.bredesen@state.tn.us

Governor Bredesen can halt Mountain Top strip mining
(AKA Mountain Top Removal) in Tennessee if he has the political pressure = You call telling him to save Tennessee’s mountains.

We need people to contact the Governor of Tennessee and express themselves regarding Mountain Top Removal in Tennessee. Bredesen billed himself as an “environmental governor” and we need him to take a position and get off the fence about Mountain Top Removal in Tennessee.

http://www.state.tn.us/governor/Conservation.do

Governor Bredesen is presiding over what is the start of the greatest ecological destruction in the 200 million year old geologic history of the Appalachia Mountains. Governor Bredesen is governor during a period where watersheds which would provide clean drinking water for another 10,000 years are destroyed. Yet during this period of catastrophic damage to Tennessee’s watersheds Gov. Bredesen remains silent—refusing to act. Every day Bredesen sits on the fence the process of cross ridge destruction accelerates. Every day Bredesen remains silent the waters of Tennessee get another choking load of sediment. http://unitedmountaindefense.org/

Tennessee mountains are becoming a national sacrifice zone. When the price of coal doubled the watch began ticking for Tennessee’s mountains. President Bush says that America has enough coal to supply America’s energy needs for another 260 years. What he doesn’t tell you is we will have to level all of our mountains to do so, and in 260 years with the human population increasing the watersheds those mountains represent will be more valuable to future generations than coal, you cannot drink coal.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1153513,00.html http://ipsnews.net/interna.asp?idnews=22410 http://unitedmountaindefense.org/facts.php

TDEC (the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation) is granting mining permits that adversely impact the waters of Tennessee. If Bredesen ordered TDEC to enforce existing state law strip mining in Tennessee would stop—all forms. Shortly after our last contact request the Commissioner of TDEC became the former Commissioner of TDEC, your letters and calls have impact.
http://www.state.tn.us/environment/

The Tennessee Water Quality Control Act (Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 69-3-101 to -137 ) forbids issuing permits for activities that pollute the waters of the state. Mountain top removal blows up the mountains layer by layer, destroying everything that lives in them.

Coal does not own Tennessee’s general assembly or governor—the
construction industry does. Tourism is a close second, strip-mining mountain tops kill’s tourism deader than raid.

Email, call and phone Bredesen. Please be polite but express you dissent to the destruction of Tennessee’s mountains. Be especially polite if you speak with any of the secretaries and clerks that do allot of the states actual work. But Bredesen needs to know that people all over the nation are watching right now to see if he acts to save our mountains.

You can find material to talk and write him about at our website at (unitedmountaindefense.org). Tennessee is a good ole boy state at its foundation. If Bredesen decides he wants to end MTR he can—he just needs the political willpower i.e. us.

The internet provides an unprecedented opportunity to tell as many people as possible about the destruction of highland watersheds. If you love mountains call Bredesen. This is not a plea for money—Tennessee’s mountains need you to call Bredesen.

For the Mountains!

Call the Governor’s ethics hotline toll free at toll-free: 1-866-442-9025 http://www.state.tn.us/governor/Ethics.do

Governor's Office Tennessee State Capitol Nashville, TN 37243-0001

Phone: 615.741.2001 Fax: 615.532.9711
Email: phil.bredesen@state.tn.us

http://www.state.tn.us/governor/Welcome.do

Visit Bredesen personally!
http://www.mapquest.com/maps/map.adp?city=nashville&state=TN&address=600+Charlotte%20Ave&zip=37243&country=us&zoom=09

Join United Mountain Defense info list: http://lists.riseup.net/www/subrequest/unitedmountaindefense

Other things you can do to help save Tennessee’s Mountains: http://unitedmountaindefense.org/get_involved.php

For the Mountains!

PS a very important hearing is coming up which you need to attend: http://unitedmountaindefense.org/permits.php

mountainjusticesummer.org

http://tinyurl.com/daqlw


Informant: Kev Hall

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/9/11/24311/5247


Informant: Alan Dicey

LabourNet Germany – Presserecht ausgehebelt. Artikel von Mag Wompel und Ralf Pandorf in Karussell – Zeitung der Bewegung für die Menschen – Nr. 5 - September/Oktober 3005 (Seite 4 der Zeitung als pdf-Datei)

http://www.labournet.de/ueberuns/beschlagnahme/karussell.pdf

Richter lassen Redaktionsräume durchsuchen. Linke Publizistik im Visier der Justizbehörden Artikel von DFB im Newsletter der dju-NRW Nr. 12 vom September 2005 (Seite 1 der Zeitung als pdf-Datei)

http://www.labournet.de/ueberuns/beschlagnahme/djunrw.pdf


Aus: LabourNet, 12. September 2005

„Die Polizeiübergriffe gegen Strukturen der außerparlamentarischen und radikalen Linken häufen sich - seien es die Durchsuchungen bei Labournet oder der anti atom aktuell, der Polizeieinsatz auf dem Prekär Camp oder das §129-Verfahren im Zusammenhang mit den Protesten gegen den Hotelbau. Auch in Berlin schlug die Polizei in den letzten Wochen zu - im Visier: die Antifa-Szene der Hauptstadt…“ Interview mit der Antifaschistischen Linken Berlin (ALB)in ak - analyse + kritik - Zeitung für linke Debatte und Praxis vom 16.9.2005

http://www.akweb.de/ak_s/ak498/38.htm


Aus: LabourNet, 12. September 2005

http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,169041,00.html


Informant: Kev Hall

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050901/REVIEWS/50826001/1023


Informant: Di

http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/members/2005/8418/8418.pdf


Informant: JHW369

says ‘People’s Daily’
Friday, September 09, 2005
The Manila Times

BEIJING: China’s most important state-run newspaper has accused US President George W. Bush and his administration of “negligence of duty” in its response to the disaster wreaked by Hurricane Katrina.

The People’s Daily, the ruling Communist Party’s mouthpiece, said there was no excuse for Bush’s slow reaction to the unfolding tragedy.

“For the Bush administration, ‘unexpected’ perhaps can be a lame excuse, but it can never explain away the government negligence of duty,” it said in an opinion piece carried on its English language website Thursday. [...] Read the rest at: http://tinyurl.com/9u2aj


© Virginia Metze

I don't usually post entire Internet posts or articles. However, this contains much valuable information for those who are trying to end the disgraceful situation in New Orleans. It was sent out by one of the most trustworthy activists.

FEMA's Blocking Relief Efforts - An Amazing List

If anyone has anymore, please add them on and let's figure out what to do with them.

9-8-5 FEMA won't accept Amtrak's help in evacuations
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/84aa35cc-1da8-11da-b40b-00000e

FEMA turns away experienced firefighters
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/9/5/105538/7048

FEMA turns back Wal-Mart supply trucks
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/05/national/nationalspec

FEMA prevents Coast Guard from delivering diesel fuel
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/05/national/nationalspec

FEMA won't let Red Cross deliver food
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05246/565143.stm

FEMA bars morticians from entering New Orleans
http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=15147862&BRD=

FEMA blocks 500-boat citizen flotilla from delivering aid
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/9/3/171718/0826

FEMA fails to utilize Navy ship with 600-bed hospital on board
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0509

FEMA to Chicago: Send just one truck
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-050902dale

FEMA turns away generators
http://www.wwltv.com/local/stories/WWLBLOG.ac3fcea.html

FEMA: "First Responders Urged Not To Respond"
http://www.fema.gov/news/newsrelease.fema?id=18470

That last one is real -- not satire but straight from FEMA's website.

What do our potential enemies think of the way our government responded to an emergency? I would think it would be important for us to at least LOOK competent. We neither were, nor looked like we were.


© Virginia Metze

Bureaucratic timidity. Bad phone lines. And a failure of imagination. Why the government was so slow to respond to catastrophe.

By Evan Thomas
Newsweek

Sept. 19, 2005 issue - It's a standing joke among the president's top aides: who gets to deliver the bad news? Warm and hearty in public, Bush can be cold and snappish in private, and aides sometimes cringe before the displeasure of the president of the United States, or, as he is known in West Wing jargon, POTUS. The bad news on this early morning, Tuesday, Aug. 30, some 24 hours after Hurricane Katrina had ripped through New Orleans, was that the president would have to cut short his five-week vacation by a couple of days and return to Washington. The president's chief of staff, Andrew Card; his deputy chief of staff, Joe Hagin; his counselor, Dan Bartlett, and his spokesman, Scott McClellan, held a conference call to discuss the question of the president's early return and the delicate task of telling him. Hagin, it was decided, as senior aide on the ground, would do the deed.

The president did not growl this time. He had already decided to return to Washington and hold a meeting of his top advisers on the following day, Wednesday. This would give them a day to get back from their vacations and their staffs to work up some ideas about what to do in the aftermath of the storm. President Bush knew the storm and its consequences had been bad; but he didn't quite realize how bad.

The reality, say several aides who did not wish to be quoted because it might displease the president, did not really sink in until Thursday night. Some White House staffers were watching the evening news and thought the president needed to see the horrific reports coming out of New Orleans. Counselor Bartlett made up a DVD of the newscasts so Bush could see them in their entirety as he flew down to the Gulf Coast the next morning on Air Force One.

How this could be—how the president of the United States could have even less "situational awareness," as they say in the military, than the average American about the worst natural disaster in a century—is one of the more perplexing and troubling chapters in a story that, despite moments of heroism and acts of great generosity, ranks as a national disgrace. [...] Read the rest at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9287434/

EMSNETWORK (EMS is apparently Emergency Medical Service) has lots of stories about the hurricane victims in New Orleans. See http://www.emsnetwork.org/artman/publish/katrina.shtml#18453

© Virginia Metze

http://tinyurl.com/8x76s
http://disc.server.com/discussion.cgi?id=149495;article=95068;show_parent=1

San Francisco Chronicle
by Mark Sandalow

09/11/05

Four years ago this morning, the nation's priorities changed. As rescuers tore through the rubble of the World Trade Center and Pentagon, President Bush vowed that fighting terrorism would be the central focus of his presidency. The nation has twice gone to war; more than 2,000 American soldiers have died, and many more Iraqis and Afghans have been killed. Hundreds of billions of dollars have been spent; security barriers have been erected; air travel has become an ordeal; and Americans have adjusted to a new way of life. And since the late summer of 2001, not a single terrorist has struck the United States. Instead, on the fourth anniversary of the nation's worst terrorist attack, America is confronting an even deadlier calamity, brought on by Mother Nature...

http://tinyurl.com/bwkng


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

CounterPunch
by Ron Jacobs

09/11/05

In New Orleans food aid is provided only to those who leave the city and in the Astrodome US military recruiters are attempting to recruit young men and women without too many alternatives into their wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Meanwhile overseas, Jay Lefkowitz, the new US envoy on human rights, is suggesting that the paltry food aid provided to northern Korea by the US should be tied to its human rights record. .... Speaking of relief efforts, Dick Cheney just returned from a tour of Halliburton areas in the disaster zone. The highlight of the tour was when a spokesman for a large segment of the people of the world told Mr. Cheney to go f... himself. Meanwhile, his old company Halliburton has already acquired some lucrative reconstruction contracts and one can assume that they will end up with a god portion of the $60 billion in reconstruction funds recently allocated by Congress. Just like in Iraq, the profiteers in blood will walk away with most of the money set aside to rebuild after Katrina's shock and awe...

http://www.counterpunch.org/jacobs09092005.html


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

Minneapolis Star Tribune
by Nora Gallagher

09/11/05

When I was a cub reporter for Time, the San Francisco police went on strike one night, and I was sent out to get the news of what was happening. I drove and walked all over. The streets were empty. Nothing was happening. Two guys were smoking marijuana in a square downtown. End of story. I went back to the bureau and filed. Two minutes later, I got a call. Go back out. There must be violence somewhere. The story had to fit a worldview or it wasn't a story. Katrina blew that away. We got the story of what is really happening in the United States right between the eyes. We got the story of how poor people live and are treated in this country by watching them suffer and die. We got the story because it happened so fast, and right in front of our faces, and no one could put a spin on it quickly enough. We got the story because television reporters were openly outraged on camera. We got the story because reporters asked real questions and demanded real answers, rather than throwing softballs and settling for the fluff and the spin that pass for news. It was raw, it was awful, and it slid under the skin of our sleepy, numb, feel-good lives...

http://www.startribune.com/stories/1519/5606301.html


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

Cato Institute
by Patrick Basham

09/12/05

Politically, President Bush may find it difficult to recover from Hurricane Katrina, but not for the reasons you might think. Mr. Bush's real problem isn't aiding the hurricane victims or the search for uplifting Reaganesque rhetoric. Instead, it's the weight of an oversized federal government that hindered both preparation for and the response to this tragedy. It is a government that may fail again during this presidency...

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=4652


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

AntiWar.Com
by Justin Raimondo

09/12/05

It's sickening, really, to contemplate the supreme arrogance of the neocons, as they berate the American people for not being virtuous enough to turn themselves into government-directed automatons. If I were Kaplan, I wouldn't obsess over this so-called shortcoming, and I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for the trend to reverse itself, either, because it'll be a cold day in Hell before that happens -- and thank the gods for that. Americans are an ornery, cantankerous, individualist lot, and always have been. What Kaplan and his ilk describe as the 'degradation' of American life -- the desire, and, yes, the determination to be happy, and find individual self-fulfillment, and to hell with the myth of collective 'goals' and 'national purpose' -- is, in reality, their greatest virtue...

http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=7226


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

Kn@ppster
by Thomas L. Knapp

The fact is that in a libertarian America, yesterday's attacks would not have happened. The fact is that in a libertarian America, yesterday's attacks couldn't have happened the way they did. To that extent, the libertarian ideal is a necessary component of the discussion that this nation will be engaging in for the foreseeable future. In a libertarian America, our government would not have its troops stationed around the world, putting out other people's fires and making enemies of those with whom we have no legitimate argument. A libertarian America would not cheer as its bombs rained down on passenger trains in Belgrade. It would not apathetically accept the deaths of Iraqi children due to the epidemic of cholera caused by our bombing of Baghdad's sanitary facilities, nor would it endure the spectacle of its own young men dragged down the streets of Mogadishu or the broken bodies of its Marines being carried from a barracks in Beirut. A libertarian America would not cheer, apathetically accept, or endure these things because these things would not happen... (originally published 09/12/01; reposted 09/11/05)

http://tinyurl.com/7t9ur

San Francisco Chronicle

09/09/05

The most expensive natural disaster in U.S. history is sucking up money at the rate of $2 billion a day -- more than the cost of the Iraq war -- and throwing an awkward spotlight on GOP efforts to extend tax cuts on dividends and capital gains and shave Medicaid spending while thousands of poor people are homeless on the Gulf Coast. Despite Republican assurances that President Bush's second-term agenda remains on track, Hurricane Katrina has dealt a blow to his plans to overhaul Social Security and the tax code, extend his signature tax cuts, shrink the federal deficit and stay the course in Iraq...

http://tinyurl.com/88m8o


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

Arizona Republic

09/10/05

Police agencies to the south of New Orleans were so fearful of the crowds attempting to leave the city after Hurricane Katrina that they sealed a crucial bridge over the Mississippi River and turned back hundreds of desperate evacuees, according to two paramedics who were in the crowd. The paramedics and two other witnesses said officers sometimes shot guns over the heads of fleeing people, who, instead of complying immediately with orders to leave the bridge, pleaded to be let through, according to the paramedics and two other witnesses. The witnesses said that they had been told by New Orleans police to cross this same bridge because buses were waiting for them there. Instead, a suburban police officer angrily ordered about 200 people to abandon an encampment between the highways near the bridge. The officer then confiscated their food and water, the four witnesses said. The incidents took place in the first days after the storm last week, they said... [Editor's note: Another horror story of how gov't action helped exacerbate the disaster- MLS]

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0910katrina-flee10.html


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

Yahoo! News

09/10/05

A federal judge has lifted a gag order that shielded the identity of librarians who received an FBI demand for records about library patrons under the Patriot Act. U.S. District Court Judge Janet Hall ruled in favor of the American Civil Liberties Union, which argued that the gag order prevented their client from participating in a debate over whether Congress should reauthorize the Patriot Act. "Clearly the judge recognized it was profoundly undemocratic to gag a librarian from participating in the Patriot Act debate," said ACLU Associate Legal Director Ann Beeson...

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050910/ap_on_re_us/patriot_act_records_8


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

Dome Blog

09/09/05

U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay's visit to Reliant Park this morning offered him a glimpse of what it's like to be living in shelter. While on the tour with top administration officials from Washington, including U.S. Secretary of Labor Elaine L. Chao and U.S. Treasury Secretary John W. Snow, DeLay stopped to chat with three young boys resting on cots. The congressman likened their stay to being at camp and asked, "Now tell me the truth boys, is this kind of fun?

http://blogs.chron.com/domeblog/archives/2005/09/delay_to_evacue.html


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

Boston Globe

09/11/05

Late on Aug. 27, less than 36 hours before Hurricane Katrina crashed into the Gulf Coast, New Orleans Mayor C. Ray Nagin's home phone rang. It was Max Mayfield, director of the National Hurricane Center in Florida. Katrina was a ''worst-case" pattern, Mayfield warned. A mandatory evacuation of New Orleans was necessary. Mayfield's advisory was in an official timeline of events compiled by the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, which oversees the National Hurricane Center. Thousands of residents were streaming north by then, alarmed by the increasingly dire predictions on the Weather Channel and on the local news. But it was not until 11 a.m. on Sunday, Aug. 28, almost 12 hours after Mayfield's call, that Nagin ordered the evacuation. The order would send buses to pick up people at designated locations and would take them to shelters, including the Superdome...

http://tinyurl.com/abpow


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

The Mail Online [UK]

09/11/05

Doctors working in hurricane-ravaged New Orleans killed critically ill patients rather than leaving them to die in agony as they evacuated hospitals, The Mail on Sunday can reveal. With gangs of rapists and looters rampaging through wards in the flooded city, senior doctors took the harrowing decision to give massive overdoses of morphine to those they believed could not make it out alive. .... Euthanasia is illegal in Louisiana, and The Mail on Sunday is protecting the identities of the medical staff concerned to prevent them being made scapegoats for the events of last week.

Their families believe their confessions are an indictment of the appalling failure of American authorities to help those in desperate need after Hurricane Katrina flooded the city, claiming thousands of lives and making 500,000 homeless.

In an extraordinary interview with The Mail on Sunday, one New Orleans doctor told how she 'prayed for God to have mercy on her soul' after she ignored every tenet of medical ethics and ended the lives of patients she had earlier fought to save...

http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=361980&in_page_id=1770&in_a_source=&ct=5


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

Dr. Ralph Moss is usually very focused on cancer treatments, so that's an important move. He is read widely.

Iris Atzmon.


HERE AT THE MOSS REPORTS

This week I begin a three-part series concerning the safety of devices such as cell phones that emit radiofrequency energy fields. Do these energy fields cause or predispose to the development of cancer? Controversy still swirls around the issue. While some researchers have concluded that the risk is minimal, others are less sanguine. A weak but statistically significant link has been established between residential exposure to energy emissions from nearby power lines and the development of a small percentage of childhood leukemias, for example (Greenland 2000; Ahlbom 2000). Researchers have repeatedly demonstrated that radiofrequency electromagnetic fields are capable of disrupting physiological processes at the cellular level, leading, among other things, to the accumulation of free radicals within the cell, and have proposed that such disturbances may in turn create conditions in which malignant change can more easily take place.

Yet agencies such as the American Cancer Society continue to issue blanket reassurances that cell phones, microwave ovens, power lines and other radiofrequency energy-emitting devices are safe, and do not contribute to the incidence of cancer.

What are we to make of these contradictory pronouncements? This is not the only sphere in which the research suggests cause for concern while the agencies charged with protecting the public’s safety insist that there is nothing to worry about. While research is still in progress the debate should remain open, yet all too often the attitude of these agencies can suggest at best a willful complacency, and at worst a stubborn and paternalistic refusal to acknowledge even the need for a continued dialog on the subject.

DO RADIOFREQUENCY ENERGY FIELDS CAUSE CANCER? PART ONE

Do devices such as cell or mobile phones, that emit radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RFEMF), cause cancer? According to the American Cancer Society (ACS), this is just another widespread "cancer myth" that is befuddling the minds of the American public. A recent ACS "cancer literacy" poll found that 30 percent of the general public agrees with the proposition that electronic devices, like cell phones, can cause cancer in people who use them.

Ted Gansler, MD, MBA, Director of Medical Content, American Cancer Society, blames the persistence of this belief on litigious lawyers and the sensationalist media. "Alarming front-page coverage," he says, is primarily to blame. The reality, says Dr. Gansler, is that although "a few studies have suggested a link with certain rare types of brain tumors the consensus among well-designed population studies is that there is no consistent association between cell phone use and brain cancer" (Gansler 2005).

"What has been proven," Dr. Gansler adds, "is that using a cell phone while driving increases the risk of having a car accident. So, keeping your hands free and your eyes on the road is a more significant issue for people who use cell phones" (Gansler 2005b) - as if one potential danger canceled out the other!

Furthermore, according to Dr. Gansler, "considerable research has also found no clear association between any other electronic consumer products and cancer."

Dr. Gansler points out that while ionizing radiation such as gamma rays and X-rays can increase cancer risk by causing changes to DNA in cells of the body, low frequency, non-ionizing radiation [such as that emitted by cell phones, ed.] does not cause these DNA changes.

This statement, as far as it goes, is true. However, direct damage to the DNA is not the only way in which harm could be done. Dr. Gansler ignores the possibility that exposure to radiofrequency energy might bring about damage indirectly, through subtle physiological effects on cellular functions. It has been established, for example, that radiofrequency electromagnetic fields can induce a wide variety of physiological changes in cell membranes, signaling pathways, cell growth cycle regulation, and other metabolic processes within the cell.

It has also been suggested that radiofrequency electromagnetic fields may cause what are called 'epigenetic’ changes. Epigenetic changes are minute alterations in gene expression, which are brought about by environmental influences. Such alterations in the settings of individual genes can have far-reaching results – as, for example, when a protective gene is deactivated, or a dormant gene switched on. Epigenetic changes, in other words, even though they do not involve direct damage to the DNA, can cause radical alterations in gene expression and cellular functions that can last a lifetime, and that may result in a significantly increased risk of an individual developing cancer and other diseases.

Effects on Melatonin

Furthermore, radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure may possibly exert a disruptive effect on the body’s hormonal systems, with wide-ranging consequences. As researchers at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle have shown, RFEMF is capable of suppressing pineal gland production of the hormone, melatonin. Melatonin may exert a protective effect against cancer, and depressed melatonin levels may in turn predispose towards the development of cancer (Davis 2001).

Other subtle changes in metabolic norms may also be induced by radiofrequency emissions. This summer, Turkish scientists at Suleyman Demirel University published a paper showing that exposure to 900 MHz electrical fields (the kind typically emitted by cellular telephones) suppresses production of TSH (thyroid stimulating hormone) and thyroid hormones in rats (Koyu 2005).

They have also shown that long term RFEMF exposure can lead to chronically increased levels of free radicals, which, coupled with a concomitant decrease in key antioxidant systems in the brain, can lead to a heightened risk of brain cancer. Interestingly, these researchers found that the increased risk of brain cancer could be substantially offset by administration of the dietary supplement, gingko biloba (Ilhan 2004).

A weak but consistent association between exposure to RFEMF and the development of childhood leukemia has been demonstrated. In 1999, the US National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) concluded that although the evidence was not strong, there were still reasons for caution. The NIEHS rationale, according to its own website, was that "no individual epidemiological study provided convincing evidence linking magnetic field exposure with childhood leukemia, but the overall pattern of results for some methods of measuring exposure suggested a weak association between increasing exposure to EMF and increasing risk of childhood leukemia. The small number of cases in these studies made it impossible to firmly demonstrate this association. However, the fact that similar results had been observed in studies of different populations using a variety of study designs supported this observation."

Clearly therefore, even though the association between RFEMF and disease is still very much under investigation, there are definite grounds for concern.

http://www.cancerdecisions.com/091105_page.html

Part 2:

Last week we spoke about the possible link between radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RFEMF), such as are emitted by cell/mobile phones, and cancer. We continue the discussion this week.

Dr. Ted Gansler, with the full authority of the American Cancer Society (ACS) behind him, confidently assures us that people who worry that there may be an association between cell phone use and cancer are victims of an urban myth. Why, then, does Dr. Gansler feel the need to provide a website address for the Food and Drug Administration Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH), which "offers advice to people concerned about their risk." He continues: "Experts from the CDRH explain practical ways to minimize exposure to radio frequency radiation while using a cell phone. Also, there’s the option of using digital rather than analog telephones."

I find this rather strange. If cell phones and other electronic devices are as innocuous as Dr. Gansler asserts then why does he encourage people to learn how to minimize their risk? Dr. Gansler and his ACS colleagues appear to be unaware that the FDA’s stated position is that "[i]t is generally agreed that further research is needed to determine what effects actually occur [from RFEMF exposure, ed.] and whether they are dangerous to people" (FDA 2002).

What the Science Shows

There are hundreds of published articles on the subject of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields and the possible association with diseases including cancer. Scientists in this field primarily must rely on laboratory and epidemiological data (i.e., population-based studies), but these often reach ambiguous or contradictory conclusions. For instance, a recent review by scientists at the Medical College of Wisconsin, Madison, was generally dismissive of a causal link between RFEMF and cancer, calling evidence for such a link "weak."

However, while the authors felt that a straightforward cause and effect link remained unproven, the article concluded: "...the existing epidemiology is limited and the possibility of epigenetic effects has not been thoroughly evaluated, so that additional research in those areas will be required for a more thorough assessment of the possibility of a causal connection between cancer and the RF energy from mobile telecommunications" (Moulder 2005).

The key word in my opinion is "limited." The bottom line is this: almost all reputable researchers in this area concede that it is really not yet definitively known whether or not radiofrequency electromagnetic fields do increase the risk of cancer. Some people take this as confirmation of their view that such devices are safe. But one would think that while the issue is still very much under investigation it would be wisest for the ACS not to brand concern about RFEMF prematurely as just another "cancer myth." It seems to me to be arrogant to declare the debate closed while the near unanimous opinion in the scientific world is that the issue is still far from settled.

Part 3:

Some Studies Find a Link

Many scientists dismiss the possibility that RFEMFs can cause cancer. But a minority disagrees. Briefly, here are just three of the current and recent studies that have indicated a link between radiofrequency electromagnetic fields and malignancy.

In the eyes of some researchers, in fact, "there is a growing amount of evidence about the harmful effects of EMFs [electromagnetic fields, ed.] on the human body, the most dangerous of which is the possible carcinogenic effect." So wrote Israeli scientists in reviewing the overall field in the spring of 2005 (Beniashvili 2005).

Drs. Leeka I. Kheifets and C. Chantal Matkin, of the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) in Palo Alto, California agree with many others that "most of the epidemiologic data do not provide strong support for an association between EMF and breast cancer." However they also state that because of the limited statistical power and the possibility of bias in much of the existing data, "it is not possible to rule out a relationship between EMF and breast cancer" (Kheifets 1999).

Significantly, EPRI is generally a pro-industry group, which includes almost 1,000 energy producers as members. As of 2001, 27 of its 30-member Board of Directors represented utility companies. Some people turn up their noses at such overtly partisan institutions. But my feeling is that pro-industry researchers would on the whole be less likely than more independent scientists to warn of the potential risks of EMF exposure, so the fact that these researchers acknowledge the possibility of a breast cancer/EMF link is very significant.

Again, I want to emphasize that most research in this field concludes that electromagnetic field exposure, at least that emanating from power lines, is harmless. Yet even among this body of literature there are a few disturbing trends in some of the data. For example, in a meta-analysis performed at the University of Cologne, Germany, Prof. Thomas C. Erren found a 12 percent increased risk of cancer in women and a 37 percent increase in men that seemed attributable to EMF exposure. Yet, like most scientists in the field, he adds a note of caution, noting "probable misclassification of exposure and the possible misclassification of the disease itself."(Erren 2001)

Scandinavian researchers have identified an increased risk for acoustic neuroma (i.e., a benign tumor of the eighth cranial nerve) in cell phone users, and a slightly increased risk of malignant brain tumors such as astrocytoma and meningioma on the same side of the brain as the cell phone was habitually held. However, the authors of this latter study have acknowledged some methodological concerns, and further investigations are planned in order to determine whether such an association can be definitively established with statistical significance (Hardell 2004 and 2005).

Most recently, the aforementioned Dr. Djemal Beniashvili and other scientists at the Edith Wolfson Medical Center, Holon, Israel postulated a link between exposure to power frequency fields and breast cancer in elderly women. They made an extensive study of medical records extending over a period of 26 years, involving the analysis of over 200,000 biopsy and surgery samples. They then compared the breast cancer rates in elderly women from an earlier period (1978-1990) to a more recent period (1991-2003), which has been characterized by a much more extensive use of personal computers (more than 3 hours a day), mobile/cell telephones, television sets, air conditioners and other household electrical appliances.

Among the elderly women who developed breast cancer in the first time frame, 19.5 percent were regularly exposed to power frequency fields. But in the more modern period 51.1 percent were so exposed, mainly through the use of personal computers. The authors conclude: "There was a statistically significant influence of EMF [electromagnetic fields, ed.] on the formation of all observed epithelial mammary tumors in Group II." This represented a more than two-fold increase, which was considered highly significant (Beniashvili 2005).

Of course, many other environmental factors have changed since the period 1978-1990, but increased environmental exposure to power frequency fields is among the more conspicuous changes to have taken place. And while there is a body of evidence that contradicts the findings of Dr. Beniashvili and his colleagues, again, there are many aspects of this question that remain to be clarified. The issue is far from conclusively settled.

It is therefore highly inappropriate for the ACS to deride the misgivings of the public on the question of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields and their possible association with cancer. I have seen the credentials and motivation of those who raise doubts about the safety of RFEMF questioned. However, the researchers who have raised doubts about the safety of RFEMFs are neither avaricious lawyers nor sensation-seeking journalists, but serious scientists, trying to do an important job in a rational, dispassionate way. For example, the senior author of this Israeli paper, Dr. Itzhak Zusman, is himself the author of 139 PubMed-listed articles, 80 of which relate to cancer. S. Ozen, who coauthored the paper on EMFs and thyroid function, is similarly well established, with 212 PubMed-listed papers to his credit.

What To Do

While it is far from clear that there is a cause and effect relationship between cell phones (or RFEMF in general) and cancer, too little is known about the actual effects to dismiss the possibility out of hand, the way the ACS does. Caution would therefore be advised. History is filled with examples of "perfectly safe" environmental factors that later turned out to be harmful, if not disastrous. As a child, I badgered my mother to let me have my feet fluoroscoped in the local shoe store. A cautious lady, she limited my exposure to a single occasion during which I got a brief and eerie glimpse of the bones in my feet. These machines were later banned after some were found to be pumping out as much as 116 roentgens of radiation - a huge dose for a trivial purpose.

As a young man I also listened to advertisements touting the health benefits of tobacco by TV personality Arthur "Buy 'Em By the Carton" Godfrey, among many others. Even the American Medical Association (AMA) accepted tobacco advertising in its journals, with such statements as, "They won't harm anybody. They will prove enjoyable." Arthur Godfrey himself later died of emphysema, a disease most commonly caused by smoking.

And even though I am generally cautious when it comes to prescription medications, I succumbed to the blandishments of the pharmaceutical companies and took Vioxx for a backache – and even prevailed upon a naturopathic physician friend to do the same. Everyone now knows that Vioxx turned out to greatly increase the risk of heart attacks and strokes.

Click on or go the the following address for my earlier newsletter on Vioxx: http://www.cancerdecisions.com/010905.html

However, one is never too old to learn caution. Thus, while I am writing this newsletter on a laptop computer that is literally on my knee, I have placed between it and my body a thick sheet of lead from the hardware store, encased in a comfortable flannel sleeve. I have even bent the front of the shield into a wide lip, because tests with a hand-held Gaussmeter tell me that much of the electromagnetic radiation leaks from the front of the machine, although the intensity of the reading drops off dramatically within a few inches from the screen. In general, I try to reduce all unnecessary exposures to electromagnetic fields, especially while I am sleeping, by switching off the electric blanket and keeping electric appliances such as radios, clocks, etc., away from my bed.

I do own and sometimes use a cell phone, but limit my exposure to its electromagnetic fields. I generally try to use it in speakerphone mode and limit the length of conversations as much as possible. And I take supplemental antioxidants with the intention of reducing free radical damage.

In this, as in other matters, I think the Precautionary Principle applies. If the consequences of an action concerning the use of technology are unknown, but are possibly highly negative, then it is better to limit exposure rather than risk the uncertain, but possibly very negative, consequences.

In my opinion, the ACS has insulted the thinking public and done a disservice to honest scientists who are trying to study the possible link of EMF exposure and cancer. The issue is hugely important. Cell/mobile phone use has doubled since 2000, and at present there are 1.5 billion subscribers worldwide (Garfield 2004).

By attaching derogatory labels to those who are on the opposite side of the debate from themselves, the researchers at ACS will no doubt please the $112 billion cell phone industry. But this does not advance public understanding. It merely stigmatizes as irrational all those who oppose unrestricted technological change and thereby hampers a necessary scientific and public dialogue.


REFERENCES:

Ahlbom A, Day N, Feychting M et al. A pooled analysis of magnetic fields and childhood leukemia. Br J Cancer. 2000;83:692-8

Beniashvili D, Avinoach'm I, Baasov D, et al. The role of household electromagnetic fields in the development of mammary tumors in women: clinical case-record observations. Med Sci Monit. 2005;11:CR10-3.

Davis S, Kaune WT, Mirick DK, et al. Residential magnetic fields, light-at-night, and nocturnal urinary 6-sulfatoxymelatonin concentration in women. Am J Epidemiol. 2001;154:591-600.

Erren TC. A meta-analysis of epidemiological studies of electric and magnetic fields and breast cancer in women and men. Bioelectromagnetics, 2001;5:105–19.

Food and Drug Administration (FDA). What biological effects can be caused by RF energy? Last updated April 3, 2002. Retrieved July 30, 2005 from: http://www.fda.gov/cellphones/rf-energy.html#2

Gansler T, Henley SJ, Stein K, et al. Sociodemographic determinants of cancer treatment health literacy. Cancer. 2005;104:653-60.

Gansler, T. Do cell phones cause cancer? American Cancer Society website, 2005b. Retrieved from: http://www.cancer.org/docroot/PED/content/PED_11_1_Do_Cell_Phones_Cause_Cancer.asp

Garfield, Larry. Mobile phone usage doubles since 2000, but growth to slow. Infosync World News Centre, Dec. 15, 2004. Retrieved from: http://www.infosyncworld.com/news/n/5636.html

Greenland S, Sheppard AR, Kaune WT, et al. A pooled analysis of magnetic fields, wire codes, and childhood leukemia. Childhood Leukemia-EMF Study Group. Epidemiology. 2000;11:624-34

Hardell L, Mild KH, Carlberg M, et al. Cellular and cordless telephone use and the association with brain tumors in different age groups. Arch Environ Health. 2004;59(3):132-7

Hardell L, Carlberg M, Mild KH. Case-control study of the association between the use of cellular and cordless telephones and malignant brain tumors diagnosed during 2000-2003. Environ Res. 2005 Jul 12

Ilhan A, Gurel A, Arcutcu F, et al. Ginkgo biloba prevents mobile phone-induced oxidative stress in rat brain. Clin Chim Acta. 2004;340:153-62.

Kheifets LI, Matkin CC. Industrialization, electromagnetic fields and breast cancer risk. Environ Health Perspect. 1999;107:145:154.

Koyu A, Cesur G, Ozguner F, et al. Effects of 900 MHz electromagnetic field on TSH and thyroid hormones in rats. Toxicol Lett. 2005;157:257-62.

McCurdy AL, Wijnberg L, Loomis D, et al. Exposure to extremely low frequency magnetic fields among working women and homemakers. Ann Occup Hyg. 2001;45:643-50.

Moulder JE, Foster KR, Erdreich LS, et al. Mobile phones, mobile phone base stations and cancer: a review. Int J Radiat Biol. 2005;8:189-203.

Scott A, Dana KM, Stevens RY: Residential magnetic fields and risk of breast cancer. Am J Epidemiol, 2002;155:446–54.

Information on EPRI retrieved July 30, 2005 from: http://www.cspinet.org/integrity/nonprofits/electric_power_research_institute.html

Information on fluoroscopes retrieved July 31, 2005 from: http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a2_414a.html

Information on American Medical Association and tobacco retrieved July 31, 2005 from: http://www.thoracic.org/chapters/ california_adobe/TobaccoHx.pd

(NIEHS website: http://www.niehs.nih.gov/emfrapid/booklet/results.htm )


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Thanks to the following for reading and commenting on all or parts of this article: D.S. Beniashvili, MD, of the Department of Pathology, E Wolfson Medical Center, Holon, Israel; Scott Davis, PhD, MS, Professor and Chairman of the Department of Epidemiology in the School of Public Health and Community Medicine at the University of Washington; and Professor John E. Moulder, PhD, Director of Radiation Biology, Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin.

by Mike Whitney

FEMA has been entirely reshaped under the Bush Administration. It’s no longer designed to meet the needs of a natural disaster but, rather, to advance the political agenda of the current regime. This is clear by the way that FEMA employees did everything in their power to undermine relief operations for the people stranded by Hurricane Katrina. Their orders simply corresponded with Washington’s intention to put the city under federal control and to forcefully-evacuate the victims to locations around the Southwest....

http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Sept05/Whitney0911-2.htm