Doris Haddock: The political issues that divide the American people are great issues, with severe consequences for the moral life of the nation and the fate of the planet. These are issues equal to the issues that divided us in 1860, and we should fear the historical similarities.
Apparently working under the assumption that no one has been paying attention over the past two and a half years, Bush delivered a speech to the National Endowment for Democracy Thursday in which he dismissed calls for the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq. http://www.madison.com/tct/opinion/index.php?ntid=57218&ntpid=0President created terror mess he describes :
Apparently working under the assumption that no one has been paying attention over the past two and a half years, Bush delivered a speech to the National Endowment for Democracy Thursday in which he dismissed calls for the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq.
Eight days after the nomination, conservative opposition to Miers continues to grow. Michael Scherer writes that the initial effort by the White House to spin her as a loyal dark horse has met an increasingly angry response from the GOP base.
Mr. Fitzgerald's pursuit now suggests he might be investigating not a narrow case on the leaking of the agent's name, but perhaps a broader conspiracy.... Lawyers familiar with the investigation believe that at least part of the outcome likely hangs on the inner workings of what has been dubbed the White House Iraq Group ... which included Messrs. Rove and Libby, that worked on setting strategy for selling the war in Iraq to the public in the months leading up to the March 2003 invasion.
Written for the web by Elizabeth Bishop, Internet News Producer
Vacaville mother and anti-war protester Cindy Sheehan plans to go to the State Capitol today to ask Gov. Schwarzenegger to pull California's National Guard troops out of Iraq.
So far, the governor's office has not agreed to meet with Sheehan.
Sheehan has toured the nation protesting the war since her son, Casey, died in Iraq last year. In August, she camped outside President Bush's ranch in Crawford, Texas, hoping to meet with him to confront him about the war.
Sheehan wants to deliver a letter to the governor. The letter reads, in part: "California is suffering each day as its law enforcement, corrections and firefighters are called to a war in Iraq which does not protect the people of California, leaving the state in a weakened position. California tax dollars are also disproportionately spent on this war. California men and women are killed and maimed in this war, and their families are left in ruins, as I too well know."
Der Sozialverband VdK hat die künftige Bundesregierung zu einem Umsteuern in der Sozialpolitik aufgerufen. Was die Menschen mit der "Agenda 2010" an Kürzungen erlebt hätten, "darf so nicht weitergehen", sagte Verbandspräsident Walter Hirrlinger der "Berliner Zeitung". Er hoffe, "dass die neue Regierung sich besinnt und die in den vergangenen Jahren herrschende Politik der sozialen Grausamkeiten nicht fortführt."
Nach Auffassung der Partei Arbeit & soziale Gerechtigkeit – Die Wahlalternative (WASG) steuert die Berliner Republik auf eine "große Koalition der Arbeitgeberinteressen" zu, die mit Kanzlerin Angela Merkel "den politisch gescheiterten Agenda–Kurs von Schröder" fortführen wolle. Das eigens für mediale Interessen inszenierte Schauspiel der politischen Eitelkeiten könne nicht verdecken, dass "die Politik der Ausblutung der Staatseinnahmen und der Zerschlagung der Sozialsysteme in den letzten Jahren von der SPD und den Unionsparteien gemeinsam getragen wurde". Schon vor Beginn der Verhandlungen über die so genannte "Koalition der neuen Möglichkeiten" stehe es fest, dass eine von der Union und der SPD getragene Bundesregierung den sozialökonomischen Abwärtstrend politisch verstärken werde.
Mark Danner is a professor of journalism and politics at the University of California at Berkeley and Bard College and the author, most recently, of Torture and Truth: America, Abu Ghraib and the War on Terror.
Not another simplistic discussion on whether we are safer in the post-9/11 era, Mark Danner reviews just where America and the world stand after President Bush announced he would rid the world of "evil" and fight the good fight against the "global war on terror."
WILL AN AVIAN FLU OUTBREAK BE THE EXCUSE FOR MARTIAL LAW?
The so-called "avian flu" is a fake.
So-called "Bird Flu" is being used as fear propaganda. This virus, H5N1, has not mutated to one that can cause human disease. The reports of deaths from "bird flu" (actually Legionnaire's Disease) in Toronto are false. It has been ruled out as the cause, but the media will continue to lie about it. There is no indication that it will mutate to a human pathogen. But the Communicable Disease Center and probably NIH have resurrected and reconstructed another much more deadly virus.
The 1918 influenza pandemic was caused by the highly communicable H1N1 virus. It was another strain of bird flu, H1N1, that DID mutate and become a dangerous pathogen. As we know, this H1N1 virus has been recovered from corpses and cultured in British and American laboratories.. If this variety is seeded around the country, the PTB will pretend that it has appeared naturally from birds and it will still be called the H5N1 virus. But it will really be a biowarfare attack by our government against its own people. They seem to be going ahead with the development of a (toxic) vaccine against H5N1, the current fake bird flu scare, but at the given time most politically advantageous, they will probably hit us with the newly strengthened and possibly even more lethal H1N1 Spanish Flu bug.
You are entirely correct in assuming that the vaccine now being developed for H5N1 will actually contain the 1918 Spanish influenza live virus. The panic stricken population will rush to get it, thinking that it will prevent the disease. This would create a huge pandemic and provide ample justification for widespread quarantines requiring martial law.
Col. (Dr.) Byron Weeks
AIDS was made in a Petri Dish in CO university, and added to vaccines given to homosexual men.
The Virus Cancer Program (1964-1980): The Birthplace of AIDS and the Kaposi’s Sarcoma Epidemic
(c) 2005 by Alan Cantwell, M.D.
The Virus Cancer Program (1964-1980): The Birthplace of AIDS and the Kaposi’s Sarcoma Epidemic
2005 by Alan Cantwell, M.D.
The epidemic of HIV/AIDS and the epidemic of “gay cancer”
Kaposi’s sarcoma (KS) is widely known as the “gay cancer” that often accompanied AIDS when the first cases broke out in gay men in Manhattan in 1979. In 1994 a new “human herpes-8” virus was discovered that is now widely accepted as the cause of all forms of KS. However, it is extremely important to note that the new KS herpes virus (KSHV) is separate and distinct from the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), the virus that causes AIDS (Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome). Therefore, it is now important to recognize that two new viruses were “introduced” into gays that produced not only the epidemic of HIV/AIDS, but also the new epidemic of KS (“gay cancer”). Two new viral epidemics erupting exclusively in homosexuals is an unprecedented event in medical science. Such a bizarre and unlikely scenario strongly suggests to me that that the two epidemics of HIV and KS are more likely to have occurred due to the deliberate or accidental “introduction” of new viruses into gay men”—and not from two viruses suddenly appearing “out of Africa.” The widely-held theory is that HIV originated in African primates in the African bush. Somehow the monkey or chimpanzee virus “jumped species” into black Africans to initiate the epidemic which has now killed 20 million people and infected 40 million more. How this sexually-transmitted virus came from black Africa to initially infect only young white gay men in Manhattan has never been explained satisfactorily. Furthermore, the epidemic in America erupted in the late 1970s, at a time when AIDS in Africa was unknown. The AIDS epidemic in Africa appeared in the autumn of 1982, at the earliest.
The man-made origin of HIV/AIDS
The man-made theory of AIDS is generally dismissed as “conspiracy theory.” Nevertheless, AIDS researchers and writers like myself, Dr. Leonard G Horowitz, Dr. Robert Strecker, Professor Robert Lee, and others have proposed for two decades that HIV was seeded into gay men when they volunteered for the experimental hepatitis B vaccine experiment which took place in Manhattan, beginning in November 1978. Additional similar hepatitis B experiments using gay men as guinea pigs continued in other American cities until 1981 —the year the AIDS epidemic became official. Some of the cities included Los Angeles and San Francisco which, along with New York City, became the three big epicenters of the epidemic. My two books on the man-made origin of this disease: AIDS and the Doctors of Death  , and Queer Blood: The Secret AIDS Genocide Plot , provide documented evidence to support this theory. A Google internet search using the key words —man-made origin of AIDS—has 246,000 citations to various websites that explore this issue in detail. Despite all this, the man-made theory remains totally ignored by the scientific establishment and the major media.
The origin of the new Kaposi’s Sarcoma virus
Like HIV, the new KS herpes virus-8 discovered in 1994 is considered to be yet another primate virus out of Africa with a suspected primate “viral ancestor” hiding in the African jungle. We are expected to believe that two primate viruses (a retrovirus and a herpes virus) jumped species in Africa at the same time —and ended up exclusively in the blood of white gay American men to produce a new immunodeficiency disease in 1979, now called AIDS. This proposed scenario suggests to me that such an unlikely African event has the markings of a scientific fairy tale, and I remain stupefied that such nonsense can pass for “science” in the twenty-first century.
The origin of Kaposi’s Sarcoma
KS has a long history dating back to 1872 in Vienna, Austria, when dermatologist Moriz Kaposi described five patients with red-purple skin tumors. Before the AIDS outbreak, KS was a very rare disease affecting mainly elderly Jewish and Italian men. It was never considered a contagious or sexually-transmitted disease. In the 1960s it was discovered that KS was a common skin cancer tumor in blacks in Central Africa, but the disease was never associated with the severe immunodeficiency characteristic of AIDS, nor was there any evidence that KS in Africa was sexually transmissible. KS was rarely, if ever, seen in African-Americans. As a dermatologist for over 30 years I never saw a KS case in a female; and KS in young men of any race or sexual persuasion was as rare as hen’s teeth before the “introduction” of HIV. KS is a medical enigma. How did a previously rare disease like KS in America become a transmissible disease primarily affecting gay men? How did this herpes KS virus escape detection during the first 15 years of the AIDS epidemic? Why did the KS virus and HIV suddenly appear together in young gay men in 1979? Further complicating this picture is the discovery of small bacterial forms known as “mycoplasma”, and the even more recent discovery of extremely tiny virus-like forms of bacteria called “nanobacteria”, as well as my published reports of “cancer bacteria” as important etiologic agents in AIDS and KS. (For details, Google: “alan cantwell” + cancer bacteria.) All these newer bacterial agents are generally ignored by AIDS researchers, who focus exclusively on viruses. I believe some of the answers to questions surrounding the origin of HIV/AIDS can be found in the annual “Progress Reports” reports of the Virus Cancer Program and the Program’s relationship to animal cancer research, genetic engineering of viruses, cancer vaccine research, and to covert biological warfare research. These hard-to-find annual Reports were published by the National Institutes of Health, Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Bethesda, Maryland.
The Virus Cancer Program (1968-1980)
The Virus Cancer Program had it roots in 1964 when Congress provided funds to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) for intensive research into the possible role of viruses in leukemia. In 1968 the Program, then titled the Special Virus-Cancer Program, was enlarged to encompass all types of cancer. On July 1, 1973 the Special Virus Cancer Program was renamed The Virus-Cancer Program (VCP) “to integrate the Program’s research activities into the framework of the new National Cancer Plan.” The Program combined the talents of many of the nation’s finest virologists, biochemists, immunologists, molecular biologists, epidemiologists, and physicians, in an attempt to uncover the viral cause of cancer. Two classes of cancer-causing viruses were studied extensively: the RNA-type tumor “retroviruses” (like HIV) and the DNA herpes-type viruses (like the KS virus). The main goals were to collect various forms of cancer tissue and test them in animals; to identify animal and human cancer-causing viruses; to grow large amounts of “candidate human viruses” for testing purposes; and to develop vaccines against these cancer viruses. In essence, the scientists wanted to learn how to use viruses to make cancer — and to force “normal” cells to become cancerous by subjecting to viruses. I have studied the annual Virus Cancer Reports (VCP) covering the years 1971-1974 and 1976-1978. Each report is 300-400 pages, and the cumulative volumes refer to thousands of animal cancer virus and genetic engineering experiments.
Biological warfare research, monkey research, and the VCP
The annual VCP Reports must be studied with an awareness that the Program became wedded to secret military biological warfare research in the early 1970s. On October 18, 1971, as part of Richard Nixon’s War on Cancer, the army’s biowarfare research laboratory at Fort Detrick, Maryland, was permanently joined with the National Cancer Institute; and was re-titled . the Frederick Cancer Research Center. Litton Bionetics was named as the military’s prime contractor . The primary task of the new Center was “the large scale production of oncogenic (cancer-causing) viruses and suspected oncogenic viruses to meet research needs on a continuing basis.” Special attention was given to primate viruses (the alleged African source of HIV and the new KS virus)— and to the successful propagation of significant amounts of “human candidate viruses.” Candidate viruses were defined as animal or human viruses that might cause human cancers. Later, the objective was to determine if such viruses could induce (either alone or with other co-carcinogens) human cancers (1977;58). Biowarfare scientists also had a keen interest in the role of human and non-human primate viruses as “helper viruses” in the production of cancer (1978;54). A steady supply of research animals (monkeys, chimpanzees, mice, cats, etc. ) was necessary; and multiple breeding colonies were established for the VCP. For example, a total of 2,274 primates from Africa and Asia were shipped to Litton for military use in 1971.
Forcing cancer viruses into primates and other animals
To induce primates and other research animals to acquire cancer, their immune system was deliberately suppressed by drugs, radiation, or cancer-causing chemicals or substances. The thymus gland and/or the spleen were removed, and cancer tissue and cancer viruses were injected into newborn animals or into the womb of pregnant animals. Some animals were deliberately infected with malaria to keep them chronically sick and immunodepressed. The U.S. is the world's leading consumer of primates, and 55,000 are used yearly in medical research. Primates (especially newborn and baby chimpanzees) are the most favored lab animals because they are most similar biochemically and immunologically to human beings. Humans share 98.4% of their DNA with chimpanzees. Chimps were extensively used by the VCP because there would be no official testing of cancer viruses on humans. Robert Gallo, the discoverer of HIV in 1984, was a project officer of a primate study contracted by Litton Bionetics that pumped cancerous human tissue, as well as a variety of primate and other viruses, into newborn macaques (a small species of monkey used as an animal model for human cancer). The actual number and identity of all the primate viruses created and adapted to human tissue during the 14 years of the SVCP is not known. In addition, some primates were released back into the wild carrying lab viruses with them. This fact is always ignored by molecular biologists searching for “viral ancestors” in the African bush, By the early 1970s, experimenters had transferred cancer-causing viruses into several species of monkeys. Herpesvirus saimiri , a monkey virus discovered in 1967 in the squirrel monkey, has a close genetic relationship to the new KS herpes virus. H . saimiri virus is harmless in the squirrel monkey, but when the virus was forced in the lab to “jump species” into different animal species, such as the owl monkey, marmosets and rabbits, it produces cancer in the form of fatal malignant lymphoma. By 1971 Dharam V Ablashi of the NCI succeeded in transferring H . saimiri, into various cell lines of human origin. (1971;35). Cancer-causing cat and hamster viruses were also engineered into macaques and other monkey species. By the early 1970s it was recognized that forms of human leukemia and lymphoma were associated with herpes-type viruses. Herpes saimiri, a DNA-type virus, became the experimental model for the study of human leukemia and lymphoma. “Thus far, the only DNA viruses associated with natural cancer of animals and man are herpes viruses” (1973;15). Luis Melendez of Harvard studied additional primate herpes viruses ( H . ateles , H . aotus , and H . saguinus ) and determined their ability to induce cancer (1973;247). Attempts were made “to find a suitable method for the large-scale production of high-titer Herpesvirus saimiri ” (1973;264). Researchers knew: “The clinical and immunological picture of human lymphoma and leukemia is closely approximated by the malignant disease induced in susceptible non-human primates by H . saimiri .” (1973;265). By 1976 it was also learned that H.saimiri could spread by “contact transmission” between squirrel and owl monkeys in the laboratory.
A monkey virus injected into humans via polio vaccines in the 1950s
There are inherent dangers in vaccine production. Many vaccines are made on living cells; and accidental contamination with bacteria, mycoplasma, viruses, and newly-recognized “nanobacteria” are constant problems during the manufacturing process. Laboratory additives (such as fetal bovine [cow] serum) may also be a source of contamination. Half the flu vaccine supply for 2004 had to be destroyed due to contamination with disease-causing bacteria. Some researchers believe that injecting living and killed viruses into the body can result in these viruses combining with other viruses normally present in the body, resulting in the formation of new viral disease-causing “recombinants.” The dangers of vaccines are downplayed to assure the public that vaccines are safe. The possibility that cancer-causing primate viruses could have been “introduced” into gays, via the experimental hepatitis B vaccine, cannot be dismissed as paranoid fantasy. In this regard, we are told that HIV is the first primate virus to “jump species” to produce an epidemic in millions of humans. But, in truth, the AIDS epidemic is the second instance in which a monkey virus has been transferred to humans. A cancer-causing monkey virus called “simian virus 40” (SV40) jumped species a half century ago when virus-contaminated polio vaccines were injected into millions of people, including half the U.S. population of that era. (For details, see: www.sv40cancer.com ) Government health officials insist there is no proof that SV40 causes human cancer. However, independent research over the past decade indicates SV40 is clearly associated with rapidly-fatal cancers of the lung (mesothelioma), bone marrow cancer (multiple myeloma), brain tumors in children, and other forms of cancer. A Washington Times report (September 21, 2003) states, “Some of the polio vaccine given to millions of American children from 1962 until 2000 could have been contaminated with a monkey virus that shows up in some cancers, according to documents and testimony to be delivered to a House committee Wednesday.” The SV40 story is detailed in the recently published, The Virus and the Vaccine: The True Story of a Cancer-Causing Monkey Virus, Contaminated Polio Vaccine, and the Millions of Americans Exposed.
The VCP and links to bio-warfare and secret human experimentation
Every annual report of the VCP makes clear that human experimentation with these newly created and genetically-engineered viruses would not be undertaken. However, the 1972 Report (p 262) also states: “Since man will not be used as an experimental recipient, it is necessary to gain proof of oncogenicity by other means.” It is well-known in science that medical doctors will not totally accept laboratory findings in animals as absolute proof. An experimental finding in animals must also be proven in humans. It cannot be assumed that covert human testing of suspected cancer-causing viruses did not take place in the thousands of experiments conducted under the auspices of the VCP, particularly with its strong ties to covert biowarfare research. The U.S. military has a long history of secret human experimentation. For proof, Google: secret human medical experimentation. Merck and Co, Inc. made most of the experimental hepatitis B vaccine that was immediately followed by AIDS cases. Some of the experimental vaccine was manufactured at the NIH. George Merck, who founded the drug company, was the leading biowarfare advisor to President Roosevelt during WW2. He was a central figure in creating the army’s biowarfare laboratory at Ft. Detrick, Maryland, which later became an integral part of the NCI. Merck’s role in the VCP was “to conduct investigations designed to develop vaccines or other agents effective for the prophylaxis and therapy for human neoplasia (cancer) of suspected viral etiology” (1972;139). Great interest was taken in developing anti-herpes virus vaccines. Research involved a new type of herpes vaccine using “purified viral protein vaccines” and a “subunit vaccine” utilizing only a piece of the herpes virus (1977;135). The Merck company declared: “Since live attenuated or killed virus vaccines for potentially oncogenic viruses would not be acceptable for human use due to the danger of transfer of functional genetic material, this project was initiated to determine whether vaccines to purified viral antigens acceptable for use in humans were of practical value.” (1977;160) (This proposed “purified” herpes vaccine was similar in type to the experimental “purified” hepatitis B vaccine injected into gays the following year.) It is my contention that the introduction of HIV and the KS virus into gay people, the most hated minority in America, was not an accident of nature due to monkeys in the jungle. Would scientists deliberately infect gay men with AIDS to finally prove that animal cancer viruses cause cancer? In the January 1987 issue of MD magazine, an Oklahoma internist wrote: “Homosexuality is a sin, deserving the death penalty.” With that kind of mentality not rare in the medical and scientific world, the answer to the question is, undoubtedly, yes.
The VCP and biohazards
The VCP was a biological disaster waiting to happen. What would happen if one or more of these dangerous cancer and immunosuppressive viruses escaped from the laboratory and produced a worldwide biologic holocaust? The 1978 report from the Office of Biohazard Safety of the VCP states: “The inadequate care and handling of animals during the past several years have created a potential for the occurrence of infection of humans with simian (primate) microorganisms and cross infection between species. Such interspecies disease transmission may seriously compromise the integrity of the experiment as well as the health of the experimenter. Due to the magnitude of biomedical research employing tissue cultures. Frequent evaluation of tissue culture cross-contamination is very important .”
The yearly large-scale production of lethal cancer viruses
By the late 1970s the mixing of animal cancer viruses with human cells to produce new “xenotropic” viruses was commonplace. The human cells in question were placenta (“afterbirth”) cells from patients with immune disease, and cells from leukemia (1978, p 192). Xenotropic viruses are viruses taken from one species and transplanted into another different species. All these experiments represent “species jumping” performed in a laboratory. By 1977 the Program was producing “approximately 60,000 liters (15,840 gallons) of tissue culture-grown viruses, propagated in over 40 different cell lines, and distributed in over 1250 shipments to over 250 participating laboratories throughout the world.” Also in 1977 Electro-Nucleonics Laboratories processed 8,044 liters (2,024 gallons) of virus-containing fluids harvested from several tissue culture systems. About half this volume was concentrated xenotropic viruses. That same year Pfizer drug company produced 28,000 liters (7,392 gallons) of virus harvest fluids. The vast majority included primate viruses, such as the Mason-Pfizer monkey virus, woolly monkey sarcoma virus and baboon endogenous virus. (This baboon virus contaminated Gallo’s lab at the NCI). Litton produced 37,438 liters (9,984 gallons) of retrovirus material consisting essentially of four agents: mouse mammary tumor virus, Raucher murine (rat) leukemia virus, Gross murine leukemia virus and baboon leukemia virus. The VCP made clear that: “Attempts are being made to chronically infect cell cultures of human epithelial and fibroblast cells and similar cell cultures from non-human primates (marmosets) with simian sarcoma virus, gibbon ape leukemia virus and baboon endogenous virus” (1977;183). A few years later primates in the African bush would be blamed for starting AIDS and the KS epidemics.
The VCP and the creation of an AIDS-like disease in chimps
In 1969 the military biowarfare experts predicted that a biological agent would be developed within a decade that would have a devastating effect on the immune system and for which there would be no treatment. (For details of this congressional testimony, Google: Donald M MacArthur + biowarfare.) The VCP had a keen interest in acquiring “information and materials from carefully selected patients suffering from immunodeficiency diseases” (1972;318). This is made clear in a 1973 Progress Report (p249) from the University of Minnesota entitled, “The search for tumor virus related information in human immunodeficiency patients with cancer” The researchers proposed “continuation of studies linking immunodeficency, cancer, and oncogenic viruses.” As biowarfare expert MacArthur predicted, new cancer-causing monster viruses (like HIV) were created by the VCP which had a deadly effect on the immune system. In one experiment recorded in the 1973 Report (p169), later published in Cancer Research in 1974, newborn chimps were taken away from their mothers at birth and weaned on milk from cancer virus-infected cows. Some of the chimps sickened and died with two diseases that had never been observed in chimpanzees. The first was Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia (later known as the “gay pneumonia” of AIDS); the second was leukemia, a cancer of the blood.
Cancer-Causing viruses and “helper” viruses
As the 1970s began it was clear that some cancer-causing viruses could not produce cancer unless a “helper” virus was present. Certain chicken, cat and mouse sarcoma viruses were found to be “defective” and unable to induce cancerous changes. However, when a “helper” leukemia virus was added to the mix, the sarcoma virus was able to induce cancer. Mixing of a mouse sarcoma virus with a cat leukemia virus produced a “hybrid virus” which could grow continuously in cat cells. Such a “hybrid virus” was adapted to human embryonic (fetal) cells (1971, p22). Thus, it is obvious that “species jumping” experiments were commonplace during the years of the VCP. By the late 1970s it was known that “type C RNA viruses” (the retroviruses connected with sarcomas and lymphomas and leukemias) existed normally in cells as “endogenous viruses” within the cellular genomes of many mammalian species. By 1977, the year the experimental hepatitis B vaccine was being made, scientists in the VCP aimed “to determine the oncogenic potential of putative human viruses” and “to begin viral vaccine (conventional or other) testing and immunization programs” (1977;32). The exact methods by which this was to be accomplished was not stated.
Primate virus contamination of human cells
The possibility that animal cancer viruses could cause contamination of viral laboratories and viral research was an accepted risk for the VCP. Primate virus contamination problems have plagued the laboratories of the world’s most famous AIDS researchers, much to their embarrassment. A decade before Gallo discovered HIV, he reported a “new” and “human” and cancer-associated “HL-23 virus” that was eventually determined to be not one but three contaminating primate viruses (gibbon-ape virus, simian sarcoma virus, and baboon endogenous virus). The baboon virus was discovered in the early 1970s at the Southwest Foundation for Research and Education in San Antonio, Texas, which hosted a chimpanzee breeding colony and produced simian viruses for research. The baboon virus somehow made its way into the blood cells of a Texas women with leukemia. When the infected cells reached Gallo’s lab they were apparently joined with an additional monkey virus and an ape virus. How these three viruses contaminated Gallo’s lab is unknown. However, George Todaro, an equally famous virologist, was quoted as saying, “You can get three viruses into a virus preparation easily just by being sloppy, and Gallo had plenty of sloppy people.” (See John Crewdson’s Science Fictions: A Scientific Mystery, A Massive Cover-Up, and the Dark Legacy of Robert Gallo, p20). As late as 1986 Max Essex of Harvard “discovered” a new human AIDS retrovirus that he found in the blood of healthy Africans. Eventually this virus also proved to be a monkey virus that originated in a nearby primate colony. Somehow the animal virus had worked its way into Essex’s lab and blood samples. Interestingly, both Gallo and Essex, the two foremost American AIDS researchers, were the leading proponents of the African green monkey theory of AIDS. Now the more widely accepted theory, proposed by Beatrice Hahn (who worked in Gallo’s lab when he proposed the green monkey theory), claims the virus traces back to chimpanzees in the African wild. Hahn has never commented on the primate contamination problems in Gallo’s lab. Could the primate “ancestors” of the RNA-type HIV retrovirus and the DNA-type herpes saimiri-like KS herpes virus have accidentally —or deliberately—worked their way into the experimental hepatitis B vaccine? The extremely high incidence of both these “new” viruses in the gay men who volunteered for the hepatitis experiments certainly provide enough additional circumstantial evidence to make the man-made theory of AIDS as plausible as the monkey out of Africa theory.
The gay hepatitis B experiments (1978-1981)
The experimental hepatitis B vaccine injected into gays was unlike any other vaccine previously made. It was developed in chimpanzees and manufactured in a year-long process of sterilization and purification of the pooled blood of 30 gay men who were hepatitis B virus carriers. During the first gay experiment (November 1978—October 1979) at the New York Blood Center, there was great concern that the vaccine might be contaminated. According to June Goodfield’s Quest for the Killers, p 86, “This was no theoretical fear, contamination having been suspected in one batch made by the National Institutes of Health, though never in Merck’s.” The men were given three inoculations of the vaccine over a period of time. The vaccine was successful with 96% of the men developing protective antibodies against the hepatitis B virus. It has been assumed by some that these men were immunosuppressed due to their promiscuity and history of venereal disease. Although the young men in the study were indeed “promiscuous” (this was a requirement for entrance into the study), they were in excellent health. Despite many previous sexual partners, these volunteers had never contracted evidence of hepatitis B infection. Furthermore, immunosuppressed people often do not respond to the vaccine. The men in the Manhattan experiment had the highest rate of HIV ever recorded for that time period (over 20% of the men were HIV-positive in 1981, and over 40% in 1984). Therefore, it must be assumed that many, if not most, of these men eventually died of AIDS. The actual number of AIDS deaths among the men in the experiment has never been revealed, nor have their medical records been studied. Attempts to secure this information have been rebuffed due to the “confidential” nature of the experiment.
The end of the VCP and the birth of AIDS
By 1980 the VCP came to an inglorious end with the inability to prove that viruses were involved in human cancer. More than any other program it built up the field of animal retrovirology, which led to a more complete understanding of how cancer and immunosuppressive retroviruses caused disease in humans. The VCP was the birthplace of genetic engineering, molecular biology, and the human genome project. I am convinced the VCP (and not Africa) is the birthplace of HIV/AIDS as well. As the VCP was winding down in the late 1970s, the gay experiments began in New York City, and continued in other cities, such as San Francisco and Los Angeles. These cities would rapidly become the three primary epicenters of the new and unprecedented “gay-related immune deficiency syndrome,” later known as AIDS. The introduction of HIV and the KS herpes virus into gay men (along with some “novel” and now-patented mycoplasmas discovered at the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology) miraculously revived the career of Robert Gallo and made him the most famous virologist in the world. And, of course, turned the “failure” of the VCP into a triumph. When Gallo’s blood test for HIV became available in the mid-1980s, the New York Blood Center's stored gay blood specimens were reexamined. Most astonishing is the fact that 20% of the gay men who volunteered for the hepatitis B experiment in Manhattan were discovered to be HIV-positive in 1980 (one year before the AIDS epidemic became "official" in 1981). This signifies that Manhattan gays in 1980 had the highest incidence of HIV anywhere in the world, including Africa, the supposed birthplace of HIV and AIDS. In addition, in 1982, in an AIDS trial in New York City one out of five gay men (20%) tested positive for the new KS herpes-8 virus when stored blood samples were re-examined by epidemiologists at the NCI in 1999. Rarely mentioned by AIDS historians is the fact that the New York Blood Center established a chimp virus laboratory for viral vaccine research in West Africa in 1974. One of the purposes of VILAB II, in Robertsfield, Liberia, was to develop the hepatitis B vaccine in chimps. The lab also prides itself by releasing "rehabilitated" (but virus-infected) chimps back into the wild. Also conveniently forgotten in the history of AIDS is LEMSIP (The Laboratory for Experimental Medicine and Surgery), the primate colony located outside New York City. For many years, until disbanded in 1997, LEMSIP supplied scientists with primates and primate parts (and unknown primate viruses) for transplantation and virus research. Primate parts (and primate viruses) were experimentally transplanted in human beings as early as the 1960s . LEMSIP was also affiliated with New York University Medical Center, where the first cases of AIDS-associated Kaposi's sarcoma were discovered in 1979. Researchers at NYU were also heavily involved in the development of the experimental hepatitis B vaccine used in gays. According to Leonard Horowitz, author of Emerging Viruses: AIDS and Ebola, NYU Medical Center received government grants and contracts connected with biological warfare research beginning in 1969. The evidence gathered here is a tiny fraction of the circumstantial evidence supporting the man-made theory of AIDS. Scientists have a long and proven history of covertly experimenting on people “in the name of science.” Anyone who takes the time to study the reports of the VCP will recognize that human experimentation with cancer viruses was undoubtedly considered and ultimately desired. Is the fact that HIV/AIDS appeared within a decade of this dangerous cancer virus experimentation a coincidence? Should AIDS be blamed on human sexuality, gays, blacks, and monkeys? I think not. There is nothing wrong or unpatriotic or “conspiratorial” in presenting the vast amount of evidence that connects out-of-control animal cancer experimentation and biowarfare research with the birth of AIDS. What is wrong, however, is the unwillingness of the scientific establishment and the media and the public to look at it.
[Dr. Cantwell is a retired dermatologist and has written two books on the man-made origin of AIDS; and two books on the infectious origin of cancer, all published by Aries Rising Press, PO Box 29532, Los Angeles, CA 90029 ( http://www.ariesrisingpress.com ). Email: email@example.com . Many of his writings can be found on http://www.google.com by typing in “alan cantwell” + articles. His latest book is Four Women Against Cancer: Bacteria, Cancer and the Origin of Life. His books are also available on http://www.amazon.com and also through Book Clearing House @ 1-800-431-1579]
mit unserer HLV INFO 156/AT v. 8.10.2005 hatten wir Sie bereits über die Thematik WLAN in Schulen informiert und ein detailliertes Schreiben an die politischen Verantwortlichen, dem Landrat, Schulderzernten, Politkern des Kreistages des Main-Kinzig-Kreises sowie die Information an die GEW und die Main-Kinzig-Schulleitung in Schlüchtern sowie deren Elternbeiräte angekündigt.
“Mit dem Laptop in den Unterricht“ - HA 20.09.2005 “Fortschritt - aber ohne Risiken“ - HA 08.10.2005
Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren,
Sie engagieren sich erfreulicherweise für die Politik im Main-Kinzig-Kreis; Sie sind in Gremien tätig, an Entscheidungsprozessen und der politischen Gestaltung des MKK’s haben Sie einen entsprechenden Anteil.
Mit anliegendem Schreiben an den Ersten Kreisbeigeordneten Herrn Günter Frenz interveniert der Hessische Landesverband mobilfunksenderfreie Wohngebiete e.V (HLV) bezüglich einer möglichen Intention, WLAN-Funksystem in Schulen des MKK einführen zu wollen.
Der HLV, dem über 120 mobilfunkkritische BI’s angeschlossen sind, bemüht sich um eine sachliche Information und Beratung seiner Mitglieder, wobei diese auf der Zielrichtung eines gesundheitsverträglichen Mobilfunks basieren.
Da auch Sie für die politische Organisation des MKK Verantwortung tragen, bitten wir Sie, sich ebenfalls mit der zugrunde liegenden Thematik zu befassen und dafür zu sorgen, dass entsprechend dem Vorsorgeauftrag des Grundgesetzes, eine Ausweitung des WLAN-Funksystems in Schulen des Main-Kinzig-Kreises unterbleibt.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Für den Vorstand
gez. Prof. inv. Dr. med. H.-J. Wilhelm Dr. E. W. Braun
Öffentlichkeitsarbeit Alfred Tittmann - Kettelerstr. 3 - 63486 Bruchköbel
There are plenty of reasons for conservatives in particular and supporters of President Bush in general to be unhappy with his selection of Harriet Miers to the current Supreme Court vacancy. Ms. Miers has never been a judge. That in itself is not a deal breaker, but it means her paper trail is shorter than your average celebrity marriage. There are no opinions to illuminate her views on any issues and precious few articles and/or briefs. She's another close friend of the president, making the cronyism charge easier to make. ... And some, including Senate Judiciary chairman Arlen Specter, have suggested that Miers may have a less-than ideal grasp on constitutional law. ... What has been harder to grasp in the past week is the anger from the political right on Miers not being conservative enough...
Some of you are going to think the dog spiked my cactus juice when you read this, but I have to say I actually admire some of the conservative dissent on Harriet Miers. Yes, the vast majority of the criticism centers on the fact that Miers doesn't appear (to them, anyway) to be a reliable conservative. She voted for tax hikes while on the Dallas City Council, she sponsored a speaker series at SMU that featured liberal women, and so on. ... But there has also been a second line of criticism complaining that she just isn't a serious enough choice. George Will, Charles Krauthammer, et al. certainly have intelligence; that Bush chose Miers insults it. I can't argue with that, and I even applaud it. It had to start sometime. Maybe the Miers fiasco will mean that some on the right will finally take a stand in defense of their principles instead of always making political excuses for the administration"...
The writer might warn that human torture is not a matter to be treated delicately, that he is not going to tone down his language, as humans torturing humans (or any other animal) is about as sick as people can be. Maybe a bit of shocking will help wake up the dulled indoctrinated minds that flourish here in America. This writer as an un-indoctrinated thinking man that also happens to have a conscience simply cannot believe the comments concerning torture that have been made by soldiers, both officers and enlisted, and by different spokespeople of different organizations, including those absolutely useless organizations - the current administration, congress, and the judiciary - and the other agencies or whatever created by the most corrupt administration to ever pollute the lives of the American people and the world...
When it comes to a reputation for selling snake oil, surely the army recruiter has long been right down there in the muck with the used car salesman and the patent medicine huckster. It's common knowledge that the promises made by recruiters about postings and future positions and training are worthless, and that once someone signs on as a recruit, her or his fate is at the whim of the military. That said, recruiters these days, desperate to fill the pipeline to Iraq's slaughterhouse with new bodies, are resorting to an interesting new spiel .... Word comes in from students in the Philadelphia area that recruiters at area high schools are warning them to enlist now, when they can pick the type of service they'd like to do, 'because there's a draft coming next year and then you'll have no choice'...
Our Society has reached a point where too many people have too much to worry about, Mortgage, rent, car payments, TAXES, alimony, child support, credit card bills, TAXES, gasoline, heating oil, natural gas, cell phone, broadband cable, satellite TV, groceries, Did I mention TAXES? Oh yeah Health, death, car, homeowners, renters, flood, earthquake insurance and the almighty 401k, IRA, annuities, and add your own stuff here...
Self-Sovereign Individual Project
by Kitty Antonik Wakfer
The real power to wage a war or stop a war (though war has never actually been declared by Congress) is in the hands of the actual soldiers, marines, airmen and sailors. If these everyday people say NO and put down their weapons and cease initiating force or stop providing direct support to those doing the force, then all the orders/edicts/threats from Washington will be just so much hot air. This is what needs to be understood and acted upon by those in Iraq and Afghanistan and those 'at home' wanting them to return...
According to the Bushies, if the United States is holding a prisoner on foreign soil, our soldiers can still subject him or her to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment -- the very forms of torture used by the soldiers who were later prosecuted for their conduct at Abu Ghraib. Does this make any sense, moral or common? So deeply does President Bush feel our country, despite all its treaty commitments, has a right to torture that he has threatened to veto the bill if it passes. This would the first time in five years he has ever vetoed anything. Think about it: Five years of stupefying pork, ideological nonsense, dumb administrative ideas, fiscal idiocy, misbegotten energy programs -- and the first thing the man vetoes is a bill to pay our soldiers because it carries an amendment saying, once again, that this country does not torture prisoners...
Even in an administration packed with appointees whose highest qualification for their posts seems to be their undying fealty to the president, George W. Bush's choice of Harriet Miers to fill Sandra Day O'Connor's Supreme Court Seat came as a shock. But probably not as shocking as what happened next: Conservative pundits, legislators, and intellectuals actually began to object, loudly. ... A few more-in-sorrow-than-in-anger expressions of doubt whether the former Texas lottery commissioner was the most qualified jurist (well, potential jurist) available would have come as no surprise. The uproar, however, seems to have utterly surprised the White House. Yet it shouldn't have. Conservatives (and libertarians) have long had ample cause for powerful buyers' remorse about Bush...
According to the democratists, it isn't just the Middle East that suffers from a 'democracy deficit.' Ukraine, Russia, the vast reaches of Central Asia, China, and a great deal of South America -- all are backward in the sense that they haven't quite reached the 'end of history,' as Francis Fukuyama and his fellow Hegelians would put it. The invasion and conquest of Iraq, and the imposition of a 'democratic' regime at gunpoint, is intended to be a model of the Bush Doctrine in practice. But it doesn't look like the experiment is working. In fact, it shows every sign of boomeranging ...
Climate scientist John M. Wallace tried to steer Vice President Al Gore away from global warming theories back in 1994. Today, Wallace has changed his thinking and has joined the overwhelming scientific consensus that says that climate change is a serious threat to the planet.
- Premières photos de protection des locaux d'ASL contre l'irradiation par les CEM des antennes relais de la macro-station d'Orange dans la basse ville de Crest. Les locaux d'ASL sont situés à environ 75 mètres faces aux antennes relais, il faut savoir que le petit Léon et d'autres VIVENT à moins de 30 mètres des antennes relais !
Pour vulgarisation nationale sur les mesures officielles de contrôles, il a été réalisé: - Un document de synthèse avec imageries qui sera mis en ligne dans quelques jours. - Un documentaire vidéo professionnel (en cours de montage) sera disponible en téléchargement.
-1er Dossier ét ude CNRS / CSO:
Contreverses et Mobilisations autour des Antennes Relais de Téléphonie Mobile (Financée par France Télécom R & D, SFR et Bouygues Télécom)
- 2ème Dossier: IUT de Nantes
Cours de CEM (notions élémentaires)
Outside the blind trusts he created to avoid a conflict of interest, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist earned tens of thousands of dollars from stock in a family-founded hospital chain largely controlled by his brother, documents show.
This article appears in the Oct. 14, 2005 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
´The Greatest Strategic Disaster in U.S. History´ by Michele Steinberg
Eyewitness reports from U.S. soldiers returning from Iraq, as well as from exiled Iraqis who have just visited Baghdad after many years, establish, without question, that the United States must immediately initiate the process to leave Iraq now—while such an exit is still possible. The only question remaining, one retired Special Forces officer told this news service, is whether the United States can "walk out of Iraq," or whether it has to "fight its way out." The U.S. occupation has destroyed the nation of Iraq, and has so botched the drafting of a so-called "constitution," that one retired Army officer and specialist on Iraq, told EIR, that the United States had better hope that the constitution is voted down, so that there is another chance to draft a new one. The present constitution is so divisive, and punishing toward the Sunnis, that the result will be civil war. These officers are only two of a number of high-ranking officers, both British and American, who say the Iraq War has not only become a quagmire, but that the Bush Administration has already lost the war.
Since the end of September, Washington has been the scene of powerful interventions by top military and retired military figures, saying it is necessary to force the White House to withdraw. At the same time, polls show George W. Bush´s Iraq War policy with only a 33% approval rating. And, an increasing number of Republican members of the Congress and the Senate are breaking with the White House on that war policy. In the House of Representatives, the number of Republican co- sponsors of legislation to force Bush to draw up a withdrawal policy, is now five, out of a total of 60 co-sponsors. The Republicans are: Walter Jones (N.C.) and Ron Paul (Tex.), who were both orginial co- sponsors, and Jim Leach (Ia.), Wayne Gilchrist (Md.), and John Duncan (Tenn.). In the Senate, the backlash against the Iraq policy was reflected in the landslide vote of 90-9, to ban the U.S. use of torture on military prisoners, and put the treatment of these prisoners under international law (see article, p. 28).
But, it appears that the more the American population, and the President´s own Republican Party, weigh in against the war, the more fanatical are the warmongering speeches given by President Bush and Vice President Cheney, as demonstrated in their respective speeches on Oct. 6 and Oct. 5. The Administration´s fanaticism, including Bush´s Oct. 6 call for further wars against Syria and Iran, makes the intervention by the military against the Iraq War all the more urgent. ´Why Not Cut and Run?´
On Sept. 28, retired Lt. Gen. William Odom, the ex-head of the National Security Agency (NSA), joined Rep. Walter Jones (R-N.C.), Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D-Hi.), and other members of the House of Representatives, at a news conference in Washington, to support their bipartisan legislation to withdraw from Iraq. Odom not only supported the legislation; he called the invasion of Iraq "the greatest strategic disaster in United States history." Odom added, "We need a broad coalition of Europeans and our allies in Asia to put things in order.... We cannot do that as long as we are in Iraq. The precondition for a serious and effective strategic engagement to stabilize this region requires withdrawal and admittance to others that we may have made an error."
But that was not all. On Oct. 3, General Odom wrote an article titled, "What´s Wrong With Cutting and Running?" (See www.Antiwar.com.) "If I were a journalist," he wrote, "I would list all the arguments that you hear against pulling U.S. troops out of Iraq, the horrible things that people say would happen, and then ask: Aren´t they happening already? Would a pullout really make things worse? Maybe it would make things better." Odom refutes in a devastating way, the arguments that the Administration usually puts forth as its only reason for "staying the course." For example: Leaving would "risk civil war," and would "encourage terrorists."
But, Odom says, there already is a civil war. "Iraqis are already fighting Iraqis. Insurgents have killed far more Iraqis than Americans. That´s civil war. We created the civil war when we invaded; we can´t prevent a civil war by staying.
"For those who really worry about destabilizing the region," Odom adds, "the sensible policy is not to stay the course in Iraq. It is rapid withdrawal, reestablishing strong relations with our allies in Europe, showing confidence in the UN Security Council, and trying to knit together a large coalition including the major states of Europe, Japan, South Korea, China, and India to back a strategy for stabilizing the area from the eastern Mediterranean to Afghanistan and Pakistan. Until the United States withdraws from Iraq and admits its strategic error, no such coalition can be formed.
"Those who fear leaving a mess are actually helping make things worse...."
There is a similar groundswell against the Iraq War, in Britain. On Oct. 2, the London Sunday Telegraph published a chilling article, citing British military historian Col. Tim Collins (ret.), who says that British forces have been decisively defeated in southern Iraq, and may soon be chased across the border into Iran.
Collins, described in the article as a respected officer whose "eve of battle address during the Iraq war has been praised as among the greatest in British military history," warned that the "incompetence and lack of direction" of the political leadership has created a situation in which "the danger is that we could face defeat in the field. We could be overwhelmed. The Army could be chased over the border into Iran." Asked how humiliating that would be for Britain, he answered, "It would be historic." He called on Prime Minister Tony Blair to "fall on his sword" for presiding over a "right rollicking cock-up."
These two military leaders are just the latest voices of warning. On Sept. 15, at an informal hearing called by Rep. Lynne Woolsey (D- Calif.), Gen. Joseph Hoar (USMC-ret.), and former Sen. Max Cleland (D- Ga.), a decorated Vietnam War vet, testified that not only is the situation in Iraq getting worse and worse, but the Army itself is "broken," and the United States is going bankrupt, paying for the no-win war. After the four-hour hearing, in which about 30 members of Congress questioned Hoar, Cleland, and other expert witnesses, the Administration could be likened to Hitler in the bunker in the early part of 1945, when World War II was lost for the Nazis, but Hitler dreamed up ever wilder expansions of the war. U.S. Creates Failed State
The reality of what is happening in Iraq is that the U.S. and U.K. forces have already been defeated. From a military standpoint, it is already a hopeless situation. EIR´s reports from a number of highly qualified military sources match precisely what Colonel Collins told the Sunday Telegraph. The situation in Iraq cannot be salvaged, so long as American and British forces remain there.
The main exit routes out of Iraq—to Jordan and Kuwait—will soon be totally in the hands of insurgents. We may soon be faced with the need to literally shoot our way out of the country. Already there are reports, in western Iraq, of Shi´ite atrocities against Sunni villages. There is no longer any area where the U.S. military is in control. The British have withdrawn from Basra, the largest city in the south, and cannot control the region. Even worse, there is a likelihood, with the continuing threats by Cheney to attack Iran, that the Iraqi Shi´ites will launch their own insurgency against the United States, in the event of a U.S. and/or Israeli attack on Shi´ite Iran.
It is already an ugly civil war. U.S. Marines who recently returned from Anbar province in Western Iraq, say that the U.S. is facing a "widespread, hard-core, nationalist insurgency," which should be understood as analogous to the French resistance to the Nazi occupation. Eventually, these returning Marines warned, the entire population opposed the Nazis, and that is what is happening now in Iraq. The hatred of the U.S. occupation is also fueled by revenge killings being carried out by Shi´a troops accompanying the U.S. forces. These Shi´a forces are not under U.S. military "fire control," and have been killing Sunnis in their villages, as revenge for the Sunni massacres of Shi´ites during the failed, U.S.-backed Shi´a uprising under President George H.W. Bush.
The brutality of the civil war—with the U.S. clearly involved in allowing pro-occupation gangs to carry out mass murders—is beginning to find its way into media reports. On Oct. 5, the website TomPaine.com noted recent reports by CBS News and the Chicago Tribune, about Iraqi Shi´ite commandos, working for the new Iraq government, who have targetted Sunnis, terrorizing families in the middle of the night, and killing Sunni men on a mass scale. Much better known, and reported sensationally in the Western media, are the actions claimed by the al-Zarqawi terrorist group that have killed hundreds of Iraqi Shi´ites in bombings of mosques and marketplaces. It is, as General Odom reports, already a civil war. But the report in TomPaine.com notes an additional element: The Shi´a forces involved in targetting of Sunnis are officially working for, and trained and equipped by the United States, in the name of stability. Meltdown in the Washington Command
On Sept. 28, at a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee, all hell broke loose, when U.S. Army Gen. George Casey, Commander of the U.S. and coalition forces in Iraq, said that there is only one battalion of "fully capable" Iraqi troops. After months of hearing reports from Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, and speeches by President Bush that there are 150,000 to 170,000 "trained" Iraqi security forces, the Senators went ballistic. After all, a battalion unit is approximately 300 to maximum 1,000 personnel, according to the Army´s official site.
Republican Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) blasted General Casey, who was testifying, demanding to know: "You had three battalions, now we´re down to one...." And a distraught Sen. Susan Collins (R-Me.) told Rumsfeld and the generals that these numbers cause a "loss of public confidence.... It doesn´t feel like progress when we hear ... that there is only one Iraqi battalion fully capable."
Rumsfeld tried to blow off the Senators´ criticism with a sneer, saying, "I think reality is these folks are not going to end up at a level of U.S. forces, period." But, for once, the Senators closed ranks and continued to demand answers. Pressed by Sen. Ted Kennedy (D- Mass.), about reports that insurgents are joining up for the Iraq police to get training, equipment, and weapons, Rumsfeld admitted it was true, then babbled, "It´s a problem faced by police forces in every major city in our country, that criminals infiltrate and sign up to join the police force."
This showdown at the Senate sent the White House and Secretary of Defense´s office into a panic. On Sept. 29, the White House announced that Bush would dedicate "all" his time and effort to the war in Iraq, with major speeches to be made by him and Vice President Cheney. On Sept. 30, Rumsfeld called a special briefing at the Pentagon, where he literally shoved General Casey aside, when reporters were pursuing questions about why the number of "capable" battalions had shrunk, and how long it would take to build them up.
According to the Defense Department transcript, Casey replied, "I think it will be a while. I think before we see much movement from one to two, it´s going to be a couple of months...."
Then, as another reporter began his question, a frantic Rumsfeld abruptly took over:
Q: "General —"
Rumsfeld: "You know, this is—just a minute. This is—there are an awful lot of people chasing the wrong rabbit here, it seems to me. And let me put up this chart; it´s illustrative. I don´t want you to write anything —"
Q: "The reason I ask is much was made of this on the Hill yesterday —"
Rumsfeld: "That´s my point. I think folks are chasing the wrong rabbit."
Needless to say, Rumsfeld´s "wrong rabbit" response did nothing to stanch the criticism of the war, but what followed from Cheney and Bush, was far worse.
According to media reports, and EIR´s sources in the Washington intelligence community, there were high-level meetings at the White House that were a combination of damage control, and flight-forward planning for attacks on Syria, to be conducted in "hot pursuit" of "terrorists" who would be fleeing an American offensive in the western Anbar province of Iraq. U.S. military strikes against Syria, and the overthrow of Syrian President Bashar Assad, remains high on the agenda of Cheney and his neo-con cabal.
While no military action has been announced against Syria, as of Oct. 6, the speeches by Cheney and Bush indicate that they fully intend to expand the Iraq war to Syria and Iran.
Speaking at the Association of the U.S. Army, on Oct. 5, Cheney shamelessly pledged more American blood for his perpetual war policy, while claiming his policy had made Iraq more secure. Cheney raved that "the only way the terrorists can win is if we lose our nerve and abandon our mission.... We will help Iraqis build a nation that is free and secure and able to defend itself; we will confront our enemies on this and every other front in the war on terror...."
And Bush´s "major speech on Iraq," delivered to the National Endowment for Democracy on Oct. 6, was a fanatical call to return to the domino theory approach of the Cold War, while threatening immediate war on Syria and Iran. Bush´s speechwriters deftly morphed Iraq into the home of Osama bin Laden, and Bush warned that if Iraq falls to Zarqawi and bin Laden, there will soon be a "radical Islamic empire that spans from Spain to Indonesia."
In response to calls to get out now, Bush said there would be "no concession, bribe, or act of appeasement," and that only "complete victory" would be accepted.
He then went into a psychotic litany attempting to prove that the war on terror is just like the war on communism. Five times he repeated: "Like the ideology of communism, our new enemy Islamic radicalism...."
Most ominously, included in the speech is a description of Syria and Iran, by name, as "state sponsors" of terrorism, who "share the goal of hurting America and moderate Muslim governments," saying that "they deserve no patience." In the most blatant threat of more war, he said, "The U.S. makes no distinction between those who commit acts of terror and those who support and harbor them, because they´re equally guilty of murder.... And the civilized world must hold those regimes to account."
There is no question that Bush and Cheney feel the walls of reality closing in on them, as the multiple criminal investigations are coming to a head, particularly the possible indictments of top White House personnel for the revenge leaking of the identity of covert CIA agent Valerie Plame Wilson, and the indictments of House Republican Majority Leader Tom DeLay.
But, feeling the political squeeze, Cheney and Bush, are planning new wars to get themselves a little "Lebensraum."
From: "Jim Dean, Democracy for America" firstname.lastname@example.org
The war in Iraq began two years ago on a promise of security -- and a web of deception. Now the mistruths have fallen away -- and we see a presidency, and American prestige, sunk in a quagmire.
The cost: almost 2,000 American lives lost. Over $300 billion spent. A growing tab for our children and grandchildren, in the form of the largest budget deficit in our country's history. And for the Iraqi people, a stable democracy -- and peace -- remain nowhere in sight.
We captured a tyrant, but made no provision for keeping the peace. An insurgency took off. Terrorists moved in. And now, we have a country in the heart of the Middle East breeding extremist violence -- and verging on civil war.
This is unacceptable. We have to address this issue and resolve it. But from Washington, we hear little but presidential excuses and the quiet wringing of hands.
Someone needs to take a stand. Here's the deal: that someone can be you.
Take the pledge to send to Washington only those leaders with the courage to face the Iraq mess head-on. Do it today:
We can shake our heads at Bush and shake our fists at the Congress. In the end, though, we make the Congress. We elect it. It answers to us. And in 2006 and 2008, we can get Congress' attention by telling our elected officials to face the facts -- or go home.
Use your power. As the time draws closer to select candidates for the next United States Congress, pledge the following:
I pledge to only support candidates who:
1. Acknowledge that the U.S. was misled into the war in Iraq
2. Advocate for a responsible exit plan with a timeline
3. Support our troops at home and abroad
As we sign the pledge, our names will appear on the Democracy for America pledge map. Let's fill it from coast to coast -- so that candidates and the media can't help but see it.
Why sign the pledge? Because you know America can't afford to take more of this. It's time for the public servants we send to Washington to face the truth.
We expect our leaders to show courage and honor for the sacrifices of our soldiers in Iraq. The best way to do that: face the crisis that has killed thousands, emptied our treasury, and destroyed our credibility.
You have shown that courage. Let's tell Washington we expect it to do the same.
Democracy for America
P.S. If 10,000 patriots sign the pledge today, that would make a great start. But 100,000 signatures would begin to set the nation's agenda. Help us reach that goal -- sign today:
Der Binnenmarktausschuss des Europäischen Parlamentes hat am 4. Oktober beschlossen, die Abstimmung über die Dienstleistungsrichtlinie auf den
20./21 November zu verschieben. Die Abstimmung im Plenum wird voraussichtlich in der Januar-Plenarsitzung des Parlamentes stattfinden, d.h. zwischen dem 16.und 19. Januar 2006. Die Konservativen und Liberalen im Binnenmarktausschuss brachten in letzter Minute vor der Sitzung noch neue Kompromissänderungsanträge ein, die inhaltlich weit von den von Evelyne Gebhardt ausgehandelten Kompromissanträgen entfernt waren. Mit diesem Manöver wollten die im Binnenmarktausschuss vertretenen Konservativen um jeden Preis verhindern, dass die von Evelyne Gebhardt vorgeschlagenen Kompromisse bald verabschiedet werden. Diese sehen insbesondere die Ausnahme der Dienste im allgemeinen wirtschaftlichen Interesse aus dem Geltungsbereich der Dienstleistungsrichtlinie, den Ausschluss jeglicher Änderung des Arbeitsrechts, insbesondere des Entsendungsrechts, durch die Dienstleistungsrichtlinie und eine tragfähige Alternative zum Herkunftslandprinzip vor: Der Zugang zum Markt soll nach den Regeln des Herkunftslandes geregelt werden –d.h. ob ein Unternehmen ein rechtmäßig niedergelassenes Unternehmen ist, entscheidet das Herkunftsland, die Erbringung der Leistung hingegen muss nach den Bedingungen des Empfängerlandes erfolgen… Siehe dazu auch:
Grenzenlos dienen Kritik aus den westlichen EU-Ländern könnte dafür sorgen, dass die europäische Dienstleistungsrichtlinie nur in abgeschwächter Form in Kraft treten kann. Artikel von Korbinian Frenzel in Jungle World vom 12. Oktober
Dangerous Illusions, or Why the Bush Regime Must Still Be Driven Out!
Frank Rich, the liberal columnist in the New York Times, recently compared George W. Bush to the Wizard of Oz, once Toto pulled the curtain open. He’s all image, according to Rich, and essentially over. The pendulum done swung. Rich goes on:
"What comes next? Having turned the page on Mr. Bush, the country hungers for a vision that is something other than either liberal boilerplate or Rovian stagecraft. At this point, merely plain old competence, integrity and heart might do it."
(The New York Times Week in Review, Sunday, September 18, 2005)
Is it true? Have falling "approval ratings" rendered Bush into a toothless old carnival barker, all smoke and mirrors, with no more ability to do damage? Has "the page been turned"? Or has Rich himself fallen victim to--and become a purveyor of--a most dangerous illusion? The Last Month
Take a look at what the supposedly "all-over-but-the-shouting" Bush regime has managed to do in just the past month or two.
Begin in Iraq, where 149,000 U.S. troops continue to enforce an occupation that gets bloodier by the day. Where the army just quietly announced adding "a few thousand" more troops for the constitutional elections in October. Where three American soldiers last week exposed the ongoing, widespread, and systematic use of torture by the U.S. army, after having their complaints suppressed within the "proper army channels" for 17 months. Look over at Iran, where U.S. commandos busily prepare the ground for military action. And then note well the refusal of any prominent Democrat to attend last week’s antiwar rallies.
Now return to the United States itself, where in early September the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the government could indefinitely imprison Jose Padilla--a U.S. citizen apprehended on U.S. soil--as an enemy combatant, simply by claiming he is a "terrorist." Padilla has now languished in jail for over three years, with no formal charges. Even mainstream newspapers noted with alarm that this ruling effectively wipes out habeas corpus for political opponents of the regime.
And then there was this week’s confirmation of John Roberts as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Roberts is a man whom the Christian Fascists found totally acceptable and who, from what little is known of his record, is clearly anti-affirmative action and anti-civil rights, anti-abortion and anti-women’s rights generally, and strongly in favor of expanding the repressive powers of the state. He was approved as Chief Justice by 78 (!) senators. Go back then to August, when the Senate unanimously approved an even more repressive version of the "Patriot Act" and when news leaked out of a secret Pentagon plan for martial law in the U.S., complete with plans to dispatch troops to key areas and begin roundups.
Move on to Lancaster, Pa., where people are fighting against the doctrine of "intelligent design," which is being used as a battering ram to undercut and eventually eliminate the teaching of evolution. Then remember that in August both Bush and Senate majority leader Bill Frist argued that intelligent design should be taught in the schools.
Finally, take a look in New Orleans, where Bush continued and intensified his administration’s racist policy toward Black people. Note his murderous actions (and inaction) during the flood’s first few days, including his "no tolerance for looters" order. Take stock of his policies since then--eliminating affirmative action and "living wage" measures in the rebuilding, dispersing people all over the country and doing nothing to reunite families, and maintaining a high degree of repression in the shelters. Look at how Bush has used the flood to further promote Christian Fascism--beginning with FEMA’s listing of Pat Robertson’s swindle operation as the number three recommended charity, and moving on to the promotion of church-sponsored charter schools and church-based operations as a central part of the relief efforts, while the government does nothing to meet the people’s just demands. And last, but unfortunately not least, ponder the orgy of racist slander and lies unleashed by his armies of fascist radio commentators, administration supporters, and Bush’s mother herself!
Even this brief list belies Frank Rich’s view that "the page has been turned" on Bush. Each and every outrage over these past six weeks has had very serious, life-and-death consequences for millions of people and, on top of that, has put into place more of the norms and infrastructure of a fascist state.
In this light, we should recall the hubbub just a few short months ago over Karl Rove’s involvement in "outing" a CIA agent. Remember? This too was about to usher in a pendulum swing. But what in fact happened? Nothing.
We should also listen to Daniel Ellsberg, the man who broke the Pentagon Papers and who is well-acquainted from the inside with "how government works." Ellsberg recently warned that the Bush administration is counting on another 9/11-type incident to change public opinion and enable the regime to bring in a military draft and a clampdown "that will make the Patriot Act look like the Bill of Rights." ("How the Antiwar Was Won," Philip Weiss, New York, October 3, 2005)
The world truly cannot wait! Deeper Reasons
But Bush himself is part of something bigger. For the past 15 to 20 years, powerful forces within the U.S. ruling class have come together around the need to change the governing "consensus" on what makes the government legitimate, and the morality and ideology underlying the "cohesion" of society--and to change it to something quite different from what has gone before. These forces are going for a much more openly imperialist policy toward the world and a fascist form of rule within the U.S., which will at minimum include a very large element of fundamentalist Christianity. Within this most unholy alliance, the Christian Fascists make up a powerful battering ram and driving force, and these forces are not going to be satisfied, as Bob Avakian has written, until this country is ruled as "a biblically based, militarized, patriarchal and male supremacist, and yes, white supremacist society--that is in essence the Christian Fascist program. And, yes, this means that their religious fundamentalist epistemology must be in command." ( Revolution, #1, May 1, 2005, "Changes in the World and the ‘Clash of Civilizations’--Within This Civilization".)
This is not transitory. Over the past 15 to 20 years, a hard-core Christian fascist social base has been nurtured and developed; it has placed its people in key positions in the courts and armed forces, developed its own massive institutions and infrastructure, and, in the process, influenced the whole of the society.
Nor is this arbitrary. It arose in the face of serious new challenges to U.S. imperialism. These include: the breakup of the old arrangements among the imperialist powers and the scramble for the U.S. to establish itself as the new Rome; the huge socio-economic changes brought on by globalization, including massive immigration, urbanization, and integration of women into the modern workforce outside the home, all of which have introduced tremendous uncertainty and dislocation into people’s lives worldwide, and shaken the old assumptions; the ‘60s legacy of critical thinking, rejection of blind patriotism, belief in equality for Black people and other oppressed nationalities, and for the emancipation of women; the ‘90s thinking, ironically enough, of "get rich quick" (with its unwillingness to "sacrifice for the country"); and other changes as well. In the face of this, an increasingly influential--and determined--section of the ruling class decided that they needed the new, and very radical, cohering norms and have systematically and relentlessly brought this movement forward.
The material underpinnings of the secular, liberal "social contract" of the "New Deal" and "Great Society" (which themselves, let us not forget, were based on imperialist plunder) have vanished, and the Democrats find themselves with no answers other than to move increasingly to the right. And so we now have Hillary Clinton echoing Bush that the war in Iraq is a "noble cause"; we have the same Clinton calling for "common ground" with anti-abortion fanatics and the Democratic Party moving to run anti-abortion candidates in the 2006 elections; and we see the Democrats conceding to the breakdown of the separation between church and state and voting for the renewed Patriot Act. This is not because they are "spineless" or "unresponsive"; it is because they share the overall objectives and fundamental assumptions of empire with the Republicans, and they do not have a coherent program of their own to deal with what our Party has called this "period of transition with potential for great upheaval."
(The above has necessarily been a broad-strokes sketch of some very complex phenomena. Readers are urged to check out the upcoming pamphlet by Bob Avakian, "The Coming Civil War And Repolarization for Revolution in the Present Era" and "The Truth About the Right-Wing Conspiracy. . . And Why Clinton and the Democrats Are No Answer" at revcom.us for a fuller analysis.) Urgently Needed: Independent Historical Action
When you look again at the past month or two and consider the deeply rooted forces driving the Bush regime’s agenda, the urgent need to act NOW stands out acutely, as does the self-defeating character of attempting to influence the Democrats--even if you call it "holding their feet to the fire." Above all, the crying need for mass action independent of the dead-end framework of politics-as-usual asserts itself with extreme urgency. November 2 must be the day when DRIVE OUT THE BUSH REGIME resounds throughout society and the world--for we really can’t wait!
People will and should come at November 2 from many different views and with many different objectives. In our view, the ultimate goal of this movement cannot and should not be a return to the previous liberal consensus which, we must emphasize again, rested on the foundation of terrible imperialist plunder. The point must be to go forward--to resolve these murderous social contradictions through a socialist revolution, led by the re-envisioned communism of Bob Avakian. Such a revolution would carry forward the best impulses and values of the ‘60s, in the only way that can truly be a step toward emancipating humanity. (See online at revcom.us/chair_e.htm)
At the same time, we all urgently need NOW to join forces and to debate the future WHILE WE ACT DECISIVELY, TOGETHER, TO DRIVE OUT THIS REGIME. It matters a great deal to people all over the world whether we resist and reverse the direction that this regime is daily bolting into place--or whether, in the name of illusionary pendulum swings and a futile hope for saviors from the Democratic Party, we allow it to go forward. It matters a great deal whether November 2 marks a new turn in society--a day that history begins to change.
Ironically, Frank Rich himself, during the Terri Schiavo ordeal, pointed out that fascists in power need only a hard core of support in society at large, if everyone else is disorganized and unable or unwilling to act. At the time, Rich put the figure at 20% of the population. Well, the Christian Fascists probably do make up about 20% of the U.S. right now and, if anything, have become even more energized in recent months. Unfortunately, for whatever reasons, Rich seems to have shrunk from the implications of his earlier insight.
But there is a real need to break with wishful thinking and plenty of reason to take heart from the potential that does in fact exist--and which can be tapped, IF WE ACT. The very depth and foulness of the changes afoot actually create the basis to reach out to the millions who are agonizing over them and urgently turning over in their minds and hearts what to do about it. November 2 is an answer, the only answer with the courage and audacity and vision to recognize the real stakes and the enormity of the challenge, and to call forward people in a way commensurate with those stakes and that challenge.
Bill Moyers, in his recent speech "9/11 And The Sport of God," discussed the "unique . . . intensity, organization and anger" of "the radical religious right," and reported on yet another burgeoning strain of this movement: "Patriot Pastors," self-styled "Christocrats," gladiators "for God marching against the very hordes of hell in our society." These forces are NOT, in other words, going gently into the night. Moyers went on to say that the success of the "the radical Christian right. . . has come in no small part because of our acquiescence and timidity." He ended by recalling the joke about the Irishman who happened on a street fight and asked if it were a private brawl--or could anyone join in?
November 2 must mark a break with this timidity and acquiescence, a turning to resistance, and the beginning of a truly two-sided fight. As the call to November 2 states,
We must, and can, aim to create a political situation where the Bush regime’s program is repudiated, where Bush himself is driven from office, and where the whole direction he has been taking society is reversed. We, in our millions, must and can take responsibility to change the course of history.
Revolution #017, October 9, 2005, posted at revcom.us This article is posted in English and Spanish on Revolution Online http://revcom.us Write: Box 3486, Merchandise Mart, Chicago, IL 60654 Phone: 773-227-4066 Fax: 773-227-4497
By a margin of 50% to 44%, Americans want Congress to consider impeaching President Bush if (like there's any doubt!) he lied about the war in Iraq, according to a new poll commissioned by AfterDowningStreet.org and conducted by Ipsos Public Affairs , the highly-regarded non-partisan polling company.
The poll above was paid for by your donations. On September 30, we set a goal of raising $10,000 to pay for this and additional polls, and thus far you've raised $9,034. Nice work!!! Now, let's see if we can dig deep and find that last $966.
George Bush's nomination of Harriet Miers is an outrage. As a corporate attorney, Miers ran a firm that paid $22 million to settle a suit asserting that "it aided a client in defrauding investors." For the past 10 years, Miers has been destroying evidence of George Bush's crimes. These include:
* his string-pulling admission into the Texas Air National Guard, ahead of 500 other applicants
* his desertion of the Texas Air National Guard with two years left to serve
* his role in the outing of Valerie Plame
* his role in approving torture of captured prisoners
In the coming months and years, Bush could be indicted for his crimes. Under no circumstances should Harriet Miers serve as Bush's personal lawyer on the United States Supreme Court.
Poll: Americans Favor Bush's Impeachment If He Lied about Iraq
By a margin of 50% to 44%, Americans say that President Bush should be impeached if he lied about the war in Iraq, according to a new poll commissioned by AfterDowningStreet.org, a grassroots coalition that supports a Congressional investigation of President Bush's decision to invade Iraq in 2003.
The poll was conducted by Ipsos Public Affairs, the highly-regarded non-partisan polling company. The poll interviewed 1,001 U.S. adults on October 8-9.
The poll found that 50% agreed with the statement:
"If President Bush did not tell the truth about his reasons for going to war with Iraq, Congress should consider holding him accountable by impeaching him."
44% disagreed, and 6% said they didn't know or declined to answer. The poll has a +/- 3.1% margin of error.
Those who agreed with the statement were also more passionate: 39% strongly agreed, while 30% strongly disagreed.
"The results of this poll are truly astonishing," said AfterDowningStreet.org co-founder Bob Fertik. "Bush's record-low approval ratings tell just half of the story, which is how much Americans oppose Bush's policies on Iraq and other issues. But this poll tells the other half of the story - that a solid plurality of Americans want Congress to consider removing Bush from the White House."
Impeachment Supported by Majorities of Many Groups
Responses varied by political party affiliation: 72% of Democrats favored impeachment, compared to 56% of Independents and 20% of Republicans.
Responses also varied by age and income. Solid majorities of those under age 55 (54%), as well as those with household incomes below $50,000 (57%), support impeachment.
Majorities favored impeachment in the Northeast (53%), West (51%), and even the South (50%).
Support for Impeachment Surged Since June
The Ipsos poll shows a dramatic transformation in support for Bush's impeachment since late June. (This is only the second poll that has asked Americans about their support for impeaching Bush in 2005, despite his record-low approval ratings.) The Zogby poll conducted June 27-29 of 905 likely voters found that 42% agreed and 50% disagreed with a statement virtually identical to the one used by Ipsos.
After the June poll, pollster John Zogby told the Washington Post that support for impeachment "was much higher than I expected." At the time, impeachment supporters trailed opponents by 8%. Now supporters outnumber opponents by 6%, a remarkable shift of 14%.
Support for Clinton Impeachment Was Much Lower
In August and September of 1998, 16 major polls asked about impeaching President Clinton http://democrats.com/clinton-impeachment-polls . Only
36% supported hearings to consider impeachment, and only 26% supported actual impeachment and removal. Even so, the impeachment debate dominated the news for months, and the Republican Congress impeached Clinton despite overwhelming public opposition.
Impeachment Support is Closely Related to Belief that Bush Lied about Iraq
Both the Ipsos and Zogby polls asked about support for impeachment if Bush lied about the reasons for war, rather than asking simply about support for impeachment. Pollsters predict that asking simply about impeachment without any context would produce a large number of "I don't know" responses. However, this may understate the percentage of Americans who favor Bush's impeachment for other reasons, such as his slow response to Hurricane Katrina, his policy on torture, soaring gasoline prices, or other concerns.
Other polls show a majority of U.S. adults believe that Bush did in fact lie about the reasons for war. A June 23-26 ABC/Washington Post poll found 52% of Americans believe the Bush administration "deliberately misled the public before the war," and 57% say the Bush administration "intentionally exaggerated its evidence that pre-war Iraq possessed nuclear, chemical or biological weapons."
Support for the war has dropped significantly since June, which suggests that the percentage of Americans who believe Bush lied about the war has increased.
Passion for Impeachment is Major Unreported Story
The strong support for impeachment found in this poll is especially surprising because the views of impeachment supporters are entirely absent from the broadcast and print media, and can only be found on the Internet and in street protests, including the large anti-war rally in Washington on September 24.
The lack of coverage of impeachment support is due in part to the fact that not a single Democrat in Congress has called for impeachment, despite considerable grassroots activism by groups like Democrats.com http://democrats.com/impeach .
"We will, no doubt, see an increase in activism following this poll," said David Swanson, co-founder of AfterDowningStreet.org. "But will we see an increase in media coverage? The media are waiting for action in Congress. Apparently it's easier to find and interview one of the 535 members of Congress than it is to locate a representative of the half of the country that wants the President impeached if he lied about the war. The media already accepts that Bush did lie about the war. We know this because so many editors and pundits told us that the Downing Street Memo was 'old news.' What we need now is journalism befitting a democracy, journalism that goes out and asks people what they really think about their government, especially George Bush."
The passion of impeachment supporters is directly responsible for the Ipsos poll. After the Zogby poll in June, activists led by Democrats.com urged all of the major polling organizations to include an impeachment question in their upcoming polls. But none of the polling organizations were willing to do so for free, so on September 30, AfterDowningStreet.org posted a request for donations to fund paid polls http://afterdowningstreet.org/polling . As of October 10, 330 individuals had contributed $8,919 in small donations averaging $27 each.
AfterDowningStreet.org has commissioned a second poll which is expected soon, and will continue to urge all polling organizations to include the impeachment question in their regular polls. If they do not, AfterDowningStreet.org will continue to commission regular impeachment polls.
1. AfterDowningStreet.org is a rapidly growing coalition of veterans' groups, peace groups, and political activist groups that was created on May 26, 2005, following the publication of the Downing Street Memos in London's Sunday Times on May 1. The coalition is urging Congress to begin a formal investigation into whether President Bush committed impeachable offenses in connection with the Iraq war.
2. Here are the complete tables from the Ipsos poll, plus the definitions of regions used by Ipsos and the U.S. Census Bureau.
3. Zogby asked: "If President Bush did not tell the truth about his reasons for going to war with Iraq, Congress should consider holding him accountable by impeaching him through impeachment."
4. Pollsters have offered various reasons for refusing to poll on impeachment. For example, Gallup said it would do so "if, and when, there is some discussion of that possibility by congressional leaders, and/or if commentators begin discussing it in the news media."
The following letter-to-the-editor was published in late September of this year in the St George-Sutherland Shire Leader, apparently the community newspaper with the bigest coverage in Sydney. It is about the forthcoming government sell of of the remainder of Telstra and Anne makes a very important point. Telstra did not respond to it for obvious reasons!
From Anne Wagstaff
Telstra’s sale appears to be full of omissions, as well as contradictions. (Your View, September 20)
This time last year Telstra warned that insurance against any risk associated with electromagnetic radiation is becoming more difficult to obtain because insurers are becoming less willing to provide cover or charging prohibitive prices. Telstra acknowledged this insurance problem in the risks section of its 2004 Annual Report*, stating “The establishment of a link between adverse health effects and electromagnetic energy (EME) could expose us to liability or negatively affect our operations.”
However, this year Telstra appears to have omitted to tell shareholders, present and potential about such insurance problems. I wonder why?
Anne Wagstaff Oatley NSW 2223
*EXTRACT of Innovation Everywhere, Telstra Annual Report 2004 under the heading Risk factors on pages 10 -11(hard copy)/pages 12-13 (soft copy)
The establishment of a link between adverse health effects and electromagnetic energy (EME) could expose us to liability or negatively affect our operations
The consensus of national and international scientific opinion is that there is no substantiated evidence of public health effects from the EME generated by radio frequency technology, including mobile phones and base stations, when used in accordance with applicable standards.
In our operations, we comply with the EME levels permitted by legislation and applicable standards. While to date we have been able to obtain limited insurance against these risks, the preparedness of insurers to give this type of insurance cover is reducing and even this limited insurance cover may not continue to be economically viable. There is a risk therefore that an actual or perceived health risk associated with mobile telecommunications equipment and facilities could:
? lead to litigation against us;
? adversely affect us by reducing the number or the growth rate of mobile telecommunications services or lowering usage per customer;
? precipitate the imposition of more onerous applicable legal requirements which are more difficult or costly to comply with; or
? hinder us in installing new mobile telecommunications equipment and facilities.
Any of these, or a combination of more than one, could have a negative effect on our results or financial position. For more information on EME, see “Information on the Company - Networks and systems - Electromagnetic energy”.
Highfields, Brantham Hill, Manningtree, Essex CO11 1SD
Mast Sanity Press Release: 11 OCTOBER 2005
(For immediate release)
IS THE COUNCIL TAX PAYER SUBSIDISING MOBILE PHONE MULTINATIONALS?
PENSIONERS ARE BEING JAILED FOR NON-PAYMENT OF COUNCIL TAX WHILE MOBILE PHONE COMPANIES USE LEGAL SYSTEM TO TRY TO AVOID RATES.
Mast Sanity is urging a full investigation into whether mobile phone companies who erect masts on both public and private property and land are meeting all their obligations in paying business rates, following a Court of Appeal ruling last year.
Lord Justices Auld, Thomas and Jacob ruled in the Supreme Court of Judicature Court of Appeal (Civil Division) on appeal in February 2004 that the mobile phone operators are commercial companies and must therefore declare and pay business rates on mobile phone masts.
In the light of the ruling, Mast Sanity believes that not only should business rates be paid but also paid at the correct level. This also means that business rates are payable not only on phone masts on highways land but on all masts including those on Government buildings and in parks. This would also include schools, blocks of private flats, churches and sports stadia. The relevant parts of such premises should be reclassified as business use and full business rates would then be payable.
Mast Sanity has been in touch with a number of local authorities about this court judgment. Some authorities are now investigating whether all the money owed is being collected and whether the District Valuer is satisfied that mobile phone companies are meeting all of their business rates obligations.
"The mobile phone companies are presently going through the European Court claiming VAT back on the 3g licence fees they paid, yet may be keeping very quiet about the significant sums of money they could owe in business rates," says Mast Sanity Trustee Yasmin Skelt.
"Mast Sanity believes there are a number of ‘hidden’ masts of which local authorities have no record, that should be subject to business rates. The fact that no proper records and databases have ever been maintained on phone masts, and many masts have slipped through planning loopholes, means that avoidance of business rates by these multinationals could run into millions. A number of hard working small businesses have been struggling to survive because of increases in business rates imposed on them, yet these multinationals could be avoiding business rates. Pensioners are facing the same increases in council tax and are being jailed because they are unable to pay the huge taxes imposed on them."
Mast Sanity also believes that the case also raises the question of whether these companies should be paying rent on highways and public land land in line with the rents they pay to private landowners.
"The Government should be looking at local authority accounts as a matter of urgency," says Mast Sanity Communications Director Karen Barratt. "Phone masts on highway verges are often close to houses and schools. The companies choose these sites because they are a cheap and easy option. If they are forced to pay rent in addition to the business rates they should be paying they might start looking for more appropriate sites."
Mast Sanity believes this matter should be properly scrutinized and clarified by parliament and it should be established if these commercial companies should be paying rent on public land that they are using to increase their profits. If it transpires that they are not legally obliged to pay commercial rent for use of public land to pursue their business interests then the Government should immediately take steps to change the law so that they do have to pay commercial rent in the same way as other businesses. Mast Sanity questions the basis of why free use of public land should be allowed for commercial purposes since this does not seem to be in the public interest. In effect, it means that ordinary people are subsidizing mobile phone masts through their council taxes.
The article below ("Real Leaders don't indulge popular fears", The Sunday Times, Comment, September 25, 2005) exemplifies the lack of transparency and blatant dishonesty we have to contend with in our EHS campaign. Dr. Don Mac Auley (director of MAIM--Mast Action in Meath) in his response letter to this article ("Tell Whole Story") exposes Sarah Carey's ties with the Irish telecommunications industry. These immediately disqualify her from being capable of presenting her readers with an evenhanded judgement of the merit of anti-mast protests. Yet, she does not pay her readers the courtesy of informing them anywhere in her article that she was employed by Irish Telecommunications. It should be obligatory--as it is in so many other sectors here-- that writers in well-esteemed papers must declare any conflicts of interest they have when publishing articles of this nature.
Best, Imelda, Cork.
For earlier reference to Sligo civil servants to strike over phone antennae see:
I was bemused by Sarah Carey's derision at today's political leaders (Real leaders don't indulge popular fears, Comment, 25 September). Her critical stance towards protest groups and their perceived fears will, in fact, reinforce the public's unease that they are never told the whole story. What Carey did not tell us is that she has been up to her ears in mobile phone controversy for several years now.
When Carey scolds masts protesters she doesn't inform us that she worked for Esat Telecom (now 02) when Denis O'Brien was competing for the second mobile phone licence. Last year she appeared in front of the Moriarty tribunal, which is investigating the awarding of this licence, where she admitted Esat made several financial contributions to Fine Gael [Irish political party].
Carey was also involved in the planning process for rolling out the Esat Digifone (now 02) mobile phone network, which may explain her revulsion towards the civil servants complaining about transmitters in Sligo. In my experience of working with the community, people feel that big business comes before concerns about health and wellbeing. Therefore, on some level I agree with Carey. We do need stronger politicians and political parties who can't be bought but defend the electorate's rights against profiteering.
Dr Don Mac Auley Navan, Co. Meath
THE SUNDAY TIMES, SEPTEMBER 25, 2005
Comment: Sarah Carey
"REAL LEADERS DON'T INDULGE POPULAR FEARS
Civil servants at a pension office in Sligo voted to go on strike last week. Not for any of the usual reasons — better pay or shorter working hours. Instead they’re threatening a walk-out because Vodafone is putting three mobile phone antennae on their roof. The workers believe that the health risks are so great it is their duty to prevent the installation at all costs. They are completely wrong, and yet convinced they are right. How can this be? There are 3.8m mobile phones in Ireland, according to ComReg, the regulator. They don’t keep a count of groups protesting against antennae, but I’d say one for every parish in the country is about right. The protesters are convinced that the non- ionising radiation emitted from the antennae is responsible for a range of conditions, from cancer to Alzheimer’s to migraine.
What these diseases have in common is that nobody is quite sure what causes them. In medieval times, people blamed sin or comets for mystery illnesses. Now we blame modern technology. A harsh comparison, but given the absence of rational thought in each case, we have to ask why there is such a huge gap between actual risk and perceived risk among the general population.
In response to people’s concerns, ComReg monitors the emissions from 400 mobile phone stations throughout the country. The full report for each station is available on its website. Completely at random I read the report on the Slieve Mish mast in Co Kerry. For each radio frequency, a maximum exposure level for the public is recommended by the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). On Slieve Mish, the highest emission at the GSM mobile phone transmission frequency was 0.01% of the maximum level recommended. In other words, the emissions are
10,000 times lower than recommended. A pretty comfortable margin of safety.
Protesters will shriek that when it comes to their health, any risk, no matter how small, is unacceptable to them. But this is a lie. Getting out of bed every day is a risk. Whether on foot, by car or by public transport, we run an actual risk of being killed simply by going somewhere. We all, including those civil servants in Sligo, own millions of radiation-emitting mobile phones. The truth is we are quite willing to take big and quantifiable risks every day.
In the case of mobile masts, it is not the level of risk involved, but the manner in which we assess that risk. People assume that the illusion of control, like a talisman, is what protects them. Since they are at the wheel of the car, they think they can overtake the truck before they meet the oncoming bus. The truck or the bus may accelerate, thus undermining the driver’s control of the situation, but this seldom occurs to the driver.
When someone thinks they are in control they will take enormous risks without flinching. When they think someone else, a big company or a government, is imposing a risk upon them, they lose the head.
The Rossport Five are beginning their fourth month in jail because they believe that Shell’s gas pipeline could kill them. Shell wants to build its gas terminal onshore because gas workers are often killed on dangerous offshore terminals, or when the helicopters taking them to and fro crash.
Shell’s pipeline has been designed to take twice the pressure that will be needed. So the chances of an accident in Co Mayo involving Shell are minuscule, and the reaction in Rossport is out of all proportion to the actual risk. But there was no planning process for the pipe, and Shell is a multinational with a nasty reputation and it is wielding compulsory purchase orders. The result is mass hysteria.
In Kinnegad, Lagan Cement has been given permission by Meath county council to burn meat and bone meal (MBM) instead of coal in its furnaces. By burning less coal, the cement company will reduce its carbon dioxide emissions by 45%, an indisputably good thing. There is a tiny risk that the MBM may contain CJD, the human equivalent of mad cow disease, so burning it at 2,000C is a reasonably effective way of completely destroying any traces.
Does that satisfy locals? Of course not. There was a huge protest around Kinnegad because people believed they were going to catch CJD. Do they also believe if they sail far enough west they will fall off the edge of the earth? The problem is that, on all of these issues, there is a complete absence of political leadership. Nobody is willing to stand up to protesters and tell them they are simply mistaken. Instead they are indulged. Wherever there are protesters there are politicians who will say things like “Their fears are real” (not “Their claims are real”). They will say that it is their job to “represent the people’s views”. Who decided that was a politician’ s job? Not Michael Collins or Eamon de Valera. Don’t politicians have the slightest obligation to tell their constituents that just because they read a mad report on the internet, that doesn’t make it true? In one sense, it’s hard to blame them because voters have a nasty habit of electing single-issue protest candidates. No TD or councillor in a proposed incinerator constituency wants to be the first to admit that we have to have them and you won’t grow another head if you live near one.
But Irish politicians are doing themselves no favours in the long run. In almost all protest campaigns the politician is ineffective. This is not an accident: it’s because they decided long ago to outsource hard decisions to politically unaccountable bodies such as An Bord Pleanala and the Environmental Protection Agency. Thus they have protected themselves from being forced to decide on tough issues and taking the rap when the hard choice has to be made.
Inevitably when paid professionals take the unpopular decisions, the ineffectiveness of the politician becomes apparent. People begin to wonder what politicians are for, and either don’t bother to vote in the next election or support an independent.
The various party conferences have been given wide coverage over the past month. Amid all these think-ins, did anyone suggest adopting a policy of standing up to protesters? No, that would be called electoral suicide. But as long as they refrain from offering true leadership on these issues, they are destroying themselves anyway. Just more slowly."
Wenn das Telefon krank...