Saturday, December 08, 2007

Update: Mis-Administration Obstruction of Justice, chief watchdog resigns, veteran abuse, and continued search for war with Iran despite NIE Report...

Update: Mis-Administration Obstruction of Justice, chief watchdog resigns, veteran abuse, and continued search for war with Iran despite NIE Report of Bush lying!

Almost a month ago we were talking about the two faced, underhanded, Bush, his routine obstruction of Justice, and his routine audacity, that time in that lying S.O.B decrying Bonds for his obstruction of Justice. Also highlighted was the routine lying about concern for wounded Americans while they survived Iraq but were dying in America and severely wounded veterans were being mistreated and denied benefits. We specifically mentioned Marine Sgt. Ty Ziegel, 25, who lost part of his skull, half of his left arm and suffered multiple other injuries in the bombing just three days before Christmas 2004. His fight for benefits was disgusting. Lies, obstruction of Justice, misuse of veterans

Along with updating those stories of lies and routine obstruction of Justice in every instance I want to update the continuing race to war with Iran. Even though bush was again caught lying Bush is still attempting to instigate war with Iran so he can embroil the entire world in his Forever war. This idiot will not stop. Soon as we discuss often he will have total control over us, his real goal, so he can finish implementing his new societal order allowing him to attack Iran and embroil the entire world in his new order forever war and one world Government.

I guarantee you that once again this tyranny and obstruction of justice came right from the top. Bush denies everything but I will guarantee you he is directing it all and leading by example! I am sick of the damn lying! Listen to this crap.

Bush and Vice President Cheney learned about videotaped interrogations of some al Qaeda suspects on Thursday, when CIA Director Michael Hayden briefed them about the existence of the tapes and their subsequent destruction, administration officials said Friday. The interrogations -- using newly approved "alternative" interrogation techniques -- of two al Qaeda suspects were recorded in 2002, Hayden said Thursday in a letter to CIA employees. They were destroyed three years later when the agency determined they had no intelligence value and could pose a security risk, he said.
"I spoke to the president this morning about this," White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said. "He has no recollection of being made aware of the tapes or their destruction before yesterday. He was briefed by General Hayden yesterday morning." The vice president learned about the tapes and their destruction at the same time, another administration official told CNN. Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Connecticut, said that was "stretching credulity. it gets worse

I am sick of this underhanded BS. I really wanted to update what severely wounded Iraq war veteran Ty Zeigler has been suffering through as he is a hero and like many has been used and abused. I was happy to see that he has been honored by a fellow marine and WW2 medal of Honor winner and it is an honor just to see him conduct himself. I was going to use his picture but just can't bring myself to. Please look at the link and see his pictures and Read his story

This is getting long and I just wanted to show that even though the chief idiot has again been caught lying, this time about Iran and its weapons program he continues to instigate for war as Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Friday the United States would continue along a two-track strategy to deal with Iran, pressing for new sanctions and demanding Tehran come clean about its nuclear program while offering talks to sweeten the deal. But Russia ignored her calls to punish Iran. Russia ignores Rice

** I hate to say it but you ignore the chief idiot to all our demise. He is going to stay the course until he finds a way to instigate war with Iran. It is a key element in his plan to goad the world to war, take control of us, and continue his march towards his goal of a one Government world with a created cheap migratory work force catering to the affluent. That is why he left the Borders open, is outsourcing our jobs, opening our markets to the entire third world, and has purposely widened the gap between the classes. He will not stop and this should really get under way in 2008. Hold on!

James m Joiner
Gardner Ma


Larry said...

By Eileen Fleming:

"We are speaking on this occasion, not as members of this or that nation, continent, or creed, but as human beings, members of the species, Man, whose continued existence is in doubt ... We shall try to say no single word which should appeal to one group rather than to another. All, equally, are in peril, and, if the peril is understood, there is hope that they may collectively avert it. ... The question we have to ask ourselves is: what steps can be taken to prevent a military conflict of which the issue must be disastrous to all species?"- Bertrand Russell and Albert Einstein, July 1955, at the height of the Cold War.

Another core issue Annapolis did not address is the fact on the ground that Israel is the only Middle Eastern state possessing nuclear weapons. Israel has not signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and has never opened up its nuclear facilities to international inspections.

Being an honest broker for peace would require America hold the state of Israel, to the very same standards of any other state or nation regarding their nuclear research and weapons facilities and demand an open and thorough inspection of the dinosaur that is the Dimona.

In March 2006, three months after the start of an historic year and a half long court case fighting for his freedom to speak to foreign journalists in 2004, Mordecahi Vanunu informed this civilian Internet journalist, "The Dimona is [over] 46 years old; reactors last 25 to 30 years. The Dimona has never been inspected and Israel has never signed the NPT but all the Arab states have…The Israelis have 200 atomic weapons and they accuse the Palestinians and Muslims of terrorism. The world needs to wake up and see the real terrorism is the occupation and the Palestinians have lived under that terror regime for 40 years." [page 111, Memoirs of a Nice Irish American 'Girl's' Life in Occupied Territory, Eileen Fleming]

Israel was the first and remains the only state in the Middle East to have nuclear weapons and thus, Israel bears a burden for the volatile region; for human nature is to desire whatever the other one has.

"Israel operates on an ossified nuclear world view can be seen in the fact that it still relies on the pre-independence State of Emergency regulations of 1945 to safeguard its nuclear activities, as if the world had stood still in the post World War II era. The sheer absence of the minutest nuclear transparency in Israel, breached by the "Vanunu affair" in the mid-1980s, reflects a society stuck in the past, clinging to a pre-globalization state of mind that perpetuates a "fortress Israel", as if it is an island immune from globalization's net of interdependencies."

The "Vanunu affair" began in 1986 when Vanunu shot two rolls of film documenting that Israel had gone nuclear. Just a few days after being baptized a Christian, Mordechai Vanunu, a secular Jew and Israeli nuclear technician was kidnapped in Rome by the Mossad, drugged, clubbed and secretly transported back to Israel. He was tried and convicted in a closed door trial of treason then spent the next 18 years of his life in prison, most of it in solitary. Vanunu was released to house arrest imprisonment under the draconian British Emergency Mandate regulations imposed on him when he moved out of his tomb sized cell without windows in Ashkelon prison to open air captivity in east Jerusalem on 21, April 2004.

In 1987, Vanunu wrote, "Why do I see the whole engine? Why do I see the precipice?...A's there all right...I do see the monster. I'm part of the system. I signed this form. Only now I am reading the rest of it. This bolt is part of a bomb. This bolt is me."

Between 1976 and 1985, Vanunu was employed at the Negev Nuclear Research Center, which manufactures nuclear weapons underground in the Negev desert. During Vanunu's employ the sign outside read "TEXTILE PLANT" and all employees signed a form agreement to never speak to anyone of what they did underground in the Negev. Vanunu kept that promise during his employment, it was nearly a year after he left Israel did he speak to anyone about what he had learned was going on underground at the Dimona WMD plant.

Because he was a good worker, Vanunu was cross trained to work in many departments and only then, did he realize that he was but a cog in the machinery of weapons of destruction and he acted because, "I've heard the voice of my conscience and there's nowhere to hide." [Vanunu, 1987]

A few days ago, over 50 nations and international groups under the leadership of President George W. Bush came together in Annapolis and have publicly committed to the process of forming a steering committee to move towards the over due establishment of a viable Palestinian state which is the only hope for security and peace for Israel.

May the leaders of the world who attended and those who were shut out also be allowed to be heard, so that the voice of conscience acting in the spirit of peace in this season of reflection also address and have mercy upon all the little children caught in the crossfire of militancy inflicted upon them from all sides because of the inhumanity of particular men.

Just days before the Annapolis meeting, the International Statement for a Middle East free of all Weapons of Mass Destruction was endorsed by USA, UK and Norway peace seeking organizations and Nobel Peace Prize Laureates calling for the Middle East to be a zone free from nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction.

The International Statement calls on Israel, as the only Middle Eastern state possessing nuclear weapons, to join the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and become fully transparent by opening its clandestine nuclear facilities to international inspections and supervision by International Atomic Energy Agency.

The International Statement disputes Iran’s nuclear program, and requests that this issue be resolved through peaceful means, through negotiations and dialogue with the representatives of the International Atomic Energy Agency, and through such measures deemed necessary by the IAEA, in accordance with the guidelines of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, of which Iran is a current signatory.

The International Statement welcomes Iran’s declaration of the peaceful nature of its nuclear program and urges Iran’s full co-operation with the International Atomic Energy Agency.

The International Statement concluded by strongly condemning the Israeli government for its continued harassment, conviction and now prison sentence imposed on Mordechai Vanunu, for simply talking to foreign journalists. The International Statement calls upon the Israeli authorities to lift all restrictions on Vanunu and allow him to go free.

All the core issues can be reduced down to the issue of the need for justice; and justice requires states and nations honor their obligations as outlined under international law and the Declaration of Human Rights that was established in 1948 and upon which the statehood of Israel was contingent upon upholding.

Forty years of military occupation aided and abetted by the 'Christian Nation' America is at the very root of much of the distress in the Middle East. While Tony Blair was still a Prime Minister he admitted that 70% of the worlds problems with terrorism can be traced back to the Israeli Palestinian conflict.

2,000 years ago Jews and Gentiles both understood that when Jesus said: "Pick up your cross and follow me." He was issuing a POLITICAL statement, for the cross back then had no religious meaning.

But the main road to Jerusalem was lined with crucified agitators, rebels, dissidents and any others who disturbed the status quo of the Roman Military Occupying Forces.

On the third day of my fifth journey to Israel Palestine, on July 16, 2007- which is also known as the 9th day of Av, the day the Jewish Temple was destroyed, I crossed paths with Vanunu on Nablus Road in East Jerusalem.

Vanunu remarked, "This is the very spot where they stoned to death the first Christian martyr for freedom of speech."

Vanunu's appeal against the six month jail sentence for interviews he gave in 2004 is scheduled to be heard January 8, 2008 and we had crossed paths in front of St. Stephen's Church.

Saint Stephen was the first follower of Jesus to be stoned to death for speaking truth to power 2,000 years ago. Stephen was martyred before the term Christian was even coined. Stephen lived in the days when those who loved Jesus were called followers of The Way; the way being in actually doing what Jesus taught; nonviolence, speak truth, seek peace and do the will of God-in a nutshell -"be just, be merciful, and walk humbly with your Lord." -Micah 6:8

May the current leaders of the world hear the voice of conscience and that all the core issues demanding justice are all on the table.

Only justice will reap security and peace in Israel Palestine.

Conscience requires the dismantling of the forty year military occupation of Palestine and justice requires equal human rights for all.

Conscience requires that Jerusalem remain open to all of Abraham's children and the world.

Justice demands that the rights of refugees be addressed and compensation be made for their displacement, pain and suffering in being denied the inalienable right to return home.

Conscience compels all to recognize and resist the inhumane harassment at hundreds of West Bank checkpoints and delays from road blocks.

Justice demands The Wall which has been deemed illegal by the Court of Justice in the Hague must fall.

Conscience repents that over nearly one and a half million people are imprisoned in Gaza-most under the age of eighteen- and in the dead of night, little children are thrown from their beds from vibrations due to the close proximity and hours of over flights of Israeli jets above their little heads.

May the voice of conscience be raised in this season of reflection as songs of peace echo within warm comfortable USA churches as sisters and brothers in Christ sing "O Little Town of Bethlehem" that they will remember all the little children of Bethlehem in the 21st century who are born, live and die under military occupation. Just as Jesus did.

"I've heard the voice of my conscience and there's nowhere to hide."

Anok said...

Jim, I'm still reading - sometimes I feel we are all preaching to the choir - but alas! We preach none the less.

Larry, sometimes I ask myself - why is it that the US tells everyone else in the world what kind of weapons they can have, when we get to have whatever ones we want?

We have nuclear capabilities. We haven't exactly been behaving well as of late (or ever, really - just now we are worse than normal) - so why is it OK for us, and not them?

Oh, yeah - 'coz we're the United States of America.

Everybody sing with me:
"America, Fuck Yeah! We're here to save the motherfuckin' day now!"

heh - mayhaps I'll be watching Team America tonight LOL.

an average patriot said...

Gee a comment I can answer at night, very good!
with what ERinsten said it just proves that as we say the more things change the more they remain the same.
there will never be peace between Israel and Palestine and Iran and others will see to it. They want their new middloe east order not Israel and Bush's version.
That wasted conference in Anapolis only served as window dressing and provided Bush's standard division so he could use it for his gain.
That division will blow the middle east and bring in the rest of the worls making Bush's purposely caused war look forced upon him. He will have to take full control of us and his new order forever war will get under way.
There will be no one world Government though only total war and chaos the like the world has never seen. Bush must be pretty happy!

Larry said...

Empire and Nuclear Weapons
by Joseph Gerson

Over the past six decades, the United States has used its nuclear arsenal in five often inter-related ways. The first was, obviously, battlefield use, with the “battlefield” writ large to include the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The long -held consensus among scholars has been that these first atomic bombings were not necessary to end the war against Japan, and that they were designed to serve a second function of the U.S. nuclear arsenal: dictating the parameters of the global (dis)order by implicitly terrorizing U.S. enemies and allies (”vassal states” in the words of former national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski.) The third function, first practiced by Harry Truman during the 1946 crisis over Azerbaijan in northern Iran and relied on repeatedly in U.S. wars in Asia and the Middle East, as well as during crises over Berlin and the Cuban Missile Crisis, has been to threaten opponents with first strike nuclear attacks in order to terrorize them into negotiating on terms acceptable to the United States or, as in the Bush wars against Iraq, to ensure that desperate governments do not defend themselves with chemical or biological weapons. Once the Soviet Union joined the nuclear club, the U.S. arsenal began to play a fourth role, making U.S. conventional forces, in the words of former Secretary of Defense Harold Brown, “meaningful instruments of military and political power.” As Noam Chomsky explains, Brown was saying that implicit and explicit U.S. nuclear threats were repeatedly used to intimidate those who might consider intervening militarily to assist those we are determined to attack.

The final role of the U.S. nuclear arsenal is deterrence, which came into play only when the Soviet Union began to achieve parity with the United States in the last years of the Vietnam War. This is popularly understood to mean preventing a surprise first strike attack against the United States by guaranteeing “mutual assured destruction.” In other words, any nation foolish enough to attack the United States with nuclear weapons will be annihilated. However, Pentagon leaders have testified that deterrence has never been U.S. policy, and they have defined deterrence as preventing other nations from taking “courses of action” that are inimical to U.S. interests. This could include decisions related to allocation of scarce resources like oil and water, defending access to markets, or preventing non-nuclear attacks against U.S. allies and clients, i.e. role #2, using genocidal nuclear weapons to define and enforce the parameters and rules of the U.S. dominated global (dis)order.

My argument is not that U.S. use and threatened use of nuclear weapons have always succeeded. Instead, successive U.S. presidents, their most senior advisers, and many in the Pentagon have believed that U.S. use of nuclear weapons has achieved U.S. goals in the past. Furthermore, these presidents have repeatedly replicated this ostensibly successful model. In fact, even the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki achieved only one of their two purposes. These first bombs of the Cold War did communicate a terrorizing message to Stalin and the Soviet elite about the capabilities of these new weapons and about the U.S. will to use them. But, within weeks of the A-bombings, Washington was sharing influence in Korea with Moscow. Four years later northern China and Manchuria, which U.S. leaders thought they had won with the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs, fell into what was seen as the Soviet sphere. In 1954 France declined the offer of two U.S. A-bombs to break the Vietnamese siege at Dienbienphu, and in 1969 North Vietnam refused to be intimidated by Nixon’s “November ultimatum.”

The U.S. commitment to nuclear dominance and its practice of threatening nuclear attacks have, in fact, been counterproductive, increasing the dangers of nuclear war in yet another way: spurring nuclear weapons proliferation. No nation will long tolerate what it experiences as an unjust imbalance of power. It was primarily for this reason that the Soviet Union (now Russia) and China, North Korea, and quite probably Iran opted for nuclear weapons.

The Romance of Ruthlessness

The Bush administration has again put nuclear weapons - and their various uses - at the center of U.S. military and foreign policy. The message of the administration’s Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) in December 2001 was unmistakable. As The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists editorialized, “Not since the resurgence of the Cold War in Ronald Reagan’s first term has U.S. defense strategy placed such an emphasis on nuclear weapons.” The NPR reiterated the U.S. commitment to first-strike nuclear war fighting. For the first time, seven nations were specifically named as primary nuclear targets: Russia, China, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya, and North Korea. Consistent with calls by senior administration figures who spoke of their “bias in favor of things that might be usable,” the NPR urged funding for development of new and more usable nuclear weapons. This included a new “bunker buster.” Seventy times more powerful than the Hiroshima A-bomb, the bunker buster was designed to destroy enemy command bunkers and WMD (weapons of mass destruction) installations buried hundreds of feet beneath the surface.

To ensure that the “bunker buster” and other new nuclear weapons could inflict their holocausts, the NPR called for accelerating preparations for the resumption of nuclear weapons testing at the Nevada Test Site. It also pressed for the nuclear weapons laboratories to continue modernizing the nuclear arsenal and to train a new generation of nuclear weapons scientists. Among their first projects would be the design of a “Reliable Replacement Warhead” to serve as the military’s primary strategic weapon for the first half of the 21st century. With a massive infusion of new funds to consolidate and revitalize nuclear research, development and production facilities, National Nuclear Security Administration Deputy Administrator Tom D’Agostino testified it would “restore us to a level of capability comparable to what we had during the Cold War.”

Later, the Rumsfeld Pentagon published and then ostensibly “rescinded” a non-classified version of its Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations. The Doctrine was revealing and profoundly disturbing. In the tradition of the Clinton administration’s Essentials of Post-Cold War Deterrence, the Doctrine communicated that the United States could all too easily “become irrational and vindictive.”

Most striking was the Doctrine’s extended discussion of deterrence. Rather than define deterrence as the prevention of nuclear attacks by other nuclear powers, the Doctrine stated that “The focus of US deterrence efforts is… to influence potential adversaries to withhold actions intended to harm US’ national interests…based on the adversary’s perception of the…likelihood and magnitude of the costs or consequences corresponding to these courses of actions.” Diplomatically, the Doctrine continued, “the central focus of deterrence is for one nation to exert such influence over a potential adversary’s decision process that the potential adversary makes a deliberate choice to refrain from a COA [course of action.]” In addition to putting Chinese diplomatic efforts to marginalize U.S. power in Asia on notice or deterring unlikely Russian or French nuclear attacks, the central role of the U.S. nuclear arsenal was global dominance. China, Russia, France and Germany were reminded of their proper places, and Iran and Venezuela received ample warning not to adopt oil and energy policies that might constitute- courses of action that would “harm U.S. national interests.”

Placing the world on further notice, the Doctrine threatened that “The US does not make positive statements defining the circumstances under which it would use nuclear weapons.” Maintaining ambiguity about when the United States would use nuclear weapons helped to “create doubt in the minds of potential adversaries.” The Doctrine also refused to rule out nuclear attacks against non-nuclear weapons states.

The Doctrine also baldly instructed the U.S. military that “no customary or conventional international law prohibits nations from employing nuclear weapons in armed conflict,” thus subordinating international law to U.S. military strategy. It also argued that nuclear wars could be won. The Doctrine gave increased authority to field commanders to propose targets for nuclear attacks and described the circumstances when field commanders could request approval to launch first-strike nuclear attacks. “Training,” it further stated, “can help prepare friendly forces to survive the effects of nuclear weapons and improve the effectiveness of surviving forces.” The Doctrine went on to reconfirm the bankruptcy of the nuclear reduction negotiations between the United States and Russia. The Doctrine was clear that U.S. nuclear forces would not actually be reduced because “US strategic nuclear weapons remain in storage and serve as an augmentation capability should US strategic nuclear force requirements rise above the levels of the Moscow Treaty.”

Toward Abolition

Since the end of the Cold War, the media and national political discourse in the United States have focused on the dangers of “horizontal proliferation.” These dangers include “rogue” states with nuclear weapons, the possibility of nations with nuclear power plants becoming nuclear weapons states, and leakage from nuclear stockpiles finding its way to “rogue” states or to non-state terrorist groups like al-Qaeda. One nightmare scenario has envisioned the overthrow of the Musharraf regime in Pakistan, with its nuclear arsenal falling into the hands of radical Islamists.

It doesn’t take a genius to understand the importance of under-funded initiatives like the congressional Nunn-Lugar Nuclear Threat Initiative, which was designed to secure the world’s nuclear weapons, fissile materials, and nuclear wastes. However, these efforts can be no more than stop-gap measures as long as the United States threatens other nations with nuclear attacks and insists on maintaining the terrorizing imbalance of power.

Since the 1995 Nuclear Nonproliferation Review Conference, popular, elite, and governmental demands have been growing for the United States and other nuclear powers to fulfill their Article VI treaty commitment to negotiate the complete elimination of their nuclear arsenals. In 1996, in the International Court of Justice’s advisory opinion on the use and threatened use of nuclear weapons ruled that both are violations of international law, and the Court directed the nuclear powers to implement their Article VI commitments. While NGOs and popular movements from across the world came together to form Abolition 2000, at the elite level former head of the U.S. Strategic Command Gen. Lee Butler - supported by many of the world’s generals and admirals - called for abolition. And, in January 2007, former secretaries of state Henry Kissinger and George Shultz joined former secretary of defense William Perry and former senator Sam Nunn in saying that U.S. double standards were driving nuclear weapons proliferation, and that the time had come for the United States to meet its NPT obligations.

Since then, pressed by voters and community based activists, John Edwards, Barack Obama, and Bill Richardson have each stated that if elected, they will be the president who negotiates the complete elimination of the world’s nuclear weapons. They need to be held to these commitments, and other presidential and congressional candidates need to be pressed to join their commitment. (Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel have made similar commitments.)

The political and technical steps needed to eliminate nuclear weapons have long been known. First, the United States must renounce its “first strike” nuclear wear fighting doctrines. Next it must refuse to fund the development and deployment of new nuclear weapons. The other essential steps include verified and irreversible dismantling of nuclear weapons and their installations; halting production of weapons-grade fissile material and securely containing existing stockpiles; verification, including societal verification, and intrusive inspection systems; and investing power in a supranational authority, probably the UN Security Council, to isolate, contain, or remove threats to the nuclear-free order.

Like cannibalism and slavery, nuclear weapons can be abolished. The question is whether we humans have the will and courage to choose life.

Table 1: Partial Listing of Incidents of Nuclear Blackmail

(From Empire and the Bomb: How the United States Uses Nuclear Weapons to Dominate the World by Joseph Gerson)

1946 Truman threatens Soviets regarding Northern Iran.
1946 Truman sends SAC bombers to intimidate Yugoslavia following the downing of U.S. aircraft over Yugoslavia.
1948 Truman threatens Soviets in response to Berlin blockade.
1950 Truman threatens Chinese when U.S. Marines were surrounded at Chosin Reservoir in Korea.
1951 Truman approves military request to attack Manchuria with nuclear weapons if significant numbers of new Chinese forces join the war.
1953 Eisenhower threatens China to force an end to Korean War on terms acceptable to the United States.
1954 Eisenhower’s Secretary of State Dulles offers French three tactical nuclear weapons to break the siege at Dienbienphu, Vietnam. Supported by Nixon’s public trial balloons.
1954 Eisenhower used nuclear armed SAC bombers to reinforce CIA-backed coup in Guatemala.
1956 Bulganin threatens London and Paris with nuclear attacks, demanding withdrawal following their invasion of Egypt.
1956 Eisenhower counters by threatening the U.S.S.R. while also demanding British and French retreat from Egypt.
1958 Eisenhower orders Joint Chiefs of Staff to prepare to use nuclear weapons against Iraq, if necessary to prevent extension of revolution into Kuwait.
1958 Eisenhower orders Joint Chiefs of Staff to prepare to use nuclear weapons against China if they invade the island of Quemoy.
1961 Kennedy threatens Soviets during Berlin Crisis.
1962 Cuban Missile Crisis.
1967 Johnson threatens Soviets during Middle East War.
1967 Johnson’s public threats against Vietnam are linked to possible use of nuclear weapons to break siege at Khe Shan.
1969 Brezhnev threatens China during border war.
1969 Nixon’s “November Ultimatum” against Vietnam.
1970 Nixon signals U.S. preparations to fight nuclear war during Black September War in Jordan.
1973 Israeli Government threatens use of nuclear weapons during the “October War.”
1973 Kissinger threatens Soviet Union during the last hours of the “October War” in the Middle East.
1973 Nixon pledges to South Vietnamese President Thieu that he will respond with nuclear attacks or the bombing of North Vietnam’s dikes if it violated the provisions of the Paris Peace Accords.
1975 Sec. of Defense Schlesinger threatens North Korea with nuclear retaliation should it attack South Korea in the wake of the U.S. defeat in Vietnam.
1980 Carter Doctrine announced.
1981 Reagan reaffirms the Carter Doctrine.
1982 British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher threatens to eliminate Buenos Aires during the Falklands War.
1990 Pakistan threatens India during confrontation over Kashmir.
1990-91 Bush threatens Iraq during the “Gulf War.”
1993 Clinton threatens North Korea.
1994 Clinton’s confrontation with North Korea.
1996 China threatens “Los Angeles” during confrontation over Taiwan. Clinton responds by sending two nuclear-capable aircraft carrier fleets through the Taiwan Straight.
1996 Clinton threatens Libya with nuclear attack to prevent completion of underground chemical weapons production complex.
1998 Clinton threatens Iraq with nuclear attack.
1999 India and Pakistan threaten and prepare nuclear threats during the Kargil War.
2001 U.S. forces placed on a DEFCON alert in the immediate aftermath of the September 11 terrorist attacks.
2001 Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld refuses to rule out using tactical nuclear weapons against Afghan caves possibly sheltering Osama Bin Laden.
2002 Bush communicates an implied threat to counter any Iraqi use of chemical weapons to defend Iraqi troops with chemical or biological weapons with a U.S. nuclear attack.
2006 French Prime Minister Chirac threatens first strike nuclear attacks against nations that practice terrorism against France.
2006 & 07 “All options are on the table”: U.S. threats to destroy Iran’s nuclear infrastructure made by President Bush and presidential candidate Senator Hillary Clinton.

an average patriot said...

You know, sadly it isn't just with nuclear weapons it is with everything. you know, do as I say not as I do.
The idiot thinks he is the sole decider of the world and that is why we are screwed.
We have the new Czar Putin preparing with the rest of the world to take on Der Fuehrer Bush And attacking Iran will kick it off as expected. Then I think you know the rest. You relax and take care!

Larry said...

This was from a Canadian paper:

By Henry Lamb:

Reaction to reports about a possible North American Union have been robust, at least. Reaction from a few conservative pundits is way beyond robust, nearing the ridiculous. Popular radio talk show host, Michael Medved, describes the reporters of a possible North American Union as bastards and creeps and jug-heads and drunks and reprobates.

John Hawkins, a blogger at;Right Wing News says claims about a North American Union are "...not true at all," and then explains why he thinks the claims are false.

People who are unfamiliar with the Security and Prosperity Partnership, or the North America Free Trade Agreement, or the Trans-Texas Corridor, or the European Union could easily believe the very superficial analysis of these two, and other pundits who have ridiculed the formation of what could easily become a North American Union.

About the only thing that is correct in the reaction of either of these two pundits is the fact that no one is admitting officially that a North American Union is under construction.

What is quite publicly under construction is a "North American Community," with the express goal of deeper "integration" of the economies and culture of the United States, Canada, and Mexico. This North American Community is the brainchild of Dr. Robert Pastor, who, as co-chair of a special Task Force of the Council on Foreign Relations, produced a report entitled "Building a North American Community".

This report is essentially a regurgitation of Pastor's earlier book: Toward a North American Community.

Among other goals, Pastor wants the three countries to:

*Adopt a common external tariff.

*Adopt a North American Approach to Regulation

*Establish a common security perimeter by 2010.

*Establish a North American investment fund

*Establish a permanent tribunal for North American dispute resolution.

*Hold an annual North American Summit meeting

*Establish minister-led working groups

*Create a North American Advisory Council

*Create a North American Inter-Parliamentary Group.

Pastor considers NAFTA to be ...the first draft of an economic constitution for North America, because it sets up the legal mechanism for achieving all his goals without bothering Congress.

The President apparently agrees with these goals, because he launched the Security and Prosperity Partnership in 2005, which consists of nearly 20 "Minister-led" working groups, with appointed bureaucrats from each of the three countries, all working toward deeper "integration" through harmonization of procedures, rules, and regulations - all of which is happening without bothering Congress.

While this is happening, Pastor, the Council on Foreign Relations, and the Security and Prosperity Partnership, all say that they "in no way, shape, or form" are working toward a North American Union. What they are working toward, is Pastor's North American Community.

If it looks like a skunk, and smells like a skunk, it's probably a skunk - regardless of what you call it.

Is it just a coincidence that what is now the European Union began its life in 1957 as a as a Customs Union called the European Economic Community. A customs union is a free trade area with a common external tariff. The participant countries set up common external trade policies.

Do Robert Pastor's ideas point to a new and better direction, or are his ideas an echo of a treacherous past that robbed European nations of their independence, their currency, and their sovereignty?

By following the European Union Timeline, it is easy to see how the European "Community" evolved into a "Common Market," and evolved its own currency, and finally established its own Parliament.

Look again at Pastor's goals. Are they not perfectly aligned with the history of the European Union? Again, it may be just a coincidence that the European Union was nurtured from the beginning by the Royal Institute for International Affairs. This non-government organization was created in 1920, by the same people who created its sister organization, the Council on Foreign Relations, in 1921.

Perhaps the North American Union is best described as a work in progress, having established a "Common Market" through NAFTA and CAFTA, and now approaching the "Community" stage through the Security and Prosperity Partnership. If the bureaucrats are not stopped by Congress, we will see, first, a "North American Inter-Parliamentary Group," which is only a step away from a North American Parliament.

People, including pundits, who fail to see this work in progress could learn much from this NAU presentation. The NAU is moving quickly, and quietly toward the same kind of political reality that now grips Europe. Only a concerned and enlightened constituency can compel elected officials to stop this erosion of America's sovereignty.

an average patriot said...

Geezus Larry!
You are something. you know, I always believed that using nukes on Japan was necessary because the estimate of 2 million dead american soldiers if we attacked japan was too much for me so I believed that excuse.
Though I always did believe it was of course a test but to serve as a threat that we would use the ultimate weapon if we did not get our way.
You know, nuclear weapons or anything nuclear can not be compared to anything else in the world. Once it is here it is here forever.
Nuke material has an indeterminable life span and this stuff will get us sooner or later. We are destroying everything and it has to be on purpose.
When you start tossing nukes around the world and blowing them out of the sky the entire world will be ruined.
Then when in the space war you blow the military satellites you have a military dead in the water and us stuck on an unliveable planet since a space full of millions of paticles of junk will have us trapped here. always a pleasure Bud!

Larry said...

Check this out Jim:

The North American Union is up and running in all but name, with about as much chance of not being officially ratified as Gordon Brown, or David Miliband, not signing the Lisbon Constitution... sorry, Treaty. This North American counterpart of the European Union was born out of the same mould. It started with the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) – the American doppelganger of the Common Market – and, whilst remaining under the legislative radar of the American people, became a new entity controlling transportation, law enforcement, banking, manufacturing, education, construction, military and, not unsurprisingly, immigration between the three former nations at the SPP (Security & Prosperity Partnership) Summit in Banff, Canada in September 2006.

The agreement gives U.S. corporations, amongst other things, the right to break-up and exploit Mexico’s nationalised oil industry, PEMEX, in return for mass immigration of unskilled Mexican workers into the U.S. and its economy. Cheap labour and fat profits all round. Of course, there are losers; American workers find themselves out of work and unable to survive when competing for jobs with people prepared to work for pitifully low wages – a scenario with which many Britons are acquainted – and, in addition, the Mexicans just get exploited. But who cares? Profits are up, costs are down and it’s trebles all round for the fat cats!

The Canadian and Mexican armed forces helped out with the aftermath of hurricane Katrina, and are now available to assist U.S. civil enforcement agencies to deal with domestic disturbances (read as: the anticipated mass demonstrations as the American people begin to realise what’s happened whilst their backs were turned). But we know where they got that idea from, don’t we? Enter Eurogendfor (European Gendarmerie Force) which, according to its own website, was set up to “respond to the need to rapidly conduct all the spectrum of civil security actions, either on its own or in parallel with the military intervention, by providing a multinational and effective tool.” That, in case you don’t know, is EU-speak for crushing anti-EU demonstrations.

It’s no coincidence that these two ‘Unions’ are so similar. And if you wish to know what the common denominator is, then you need look no further than our old friend, the Bilderberg Conference! Once a year these arrogant leaders and business high-flyers, all of whom have undergone democracy bypass surgery, meet up and decide how to ruin ordinary peoples lives in order to line their own pockets even further. And when they have enough control (and they’re just about there) they will play the ace up their sleeve and trigger a global economic collapse. At that point a lot of people will acquiesce to their will in return for scraps of food – but not all. A sizeable majority will rebel against the New World Order (yes, we can mention that now because George Bush and Gordon Brown do). The author of the book of the same name, H.G. Wells, wrote:

“Countless people will hate the New World Order and will die protesting against it.”

He wasn’t wrong (despite being in favour of it). Democracy is ebbing away from us, the people, day by day. To be pro EU is to be pro dictatorship. The LibLabConmen are just that. And if you are a casual visitor to this site, and think that the BNP is the last party you’d vote for, then it probably will be – because you won’t be voting at all in the near future!

an average patriot said...

Larry you know I fully believe the NAU is a goal but only one part of what is to ultimately be a one world market and Government.
I have gotten some of my best information and input on the subject from concerned Canadiens. They actually talk about it and the citizens are very against it. It is being fought here in certain States but like everything else the chief idiot is doing this too we will be powerless to stop. That underhanded lying beehive!

an average patriot said...

Yeah you know it is pretty much all set up and we will not be able to stop it. It friggen kills me. When I first tried to tell those at kos that he was purposely destroying our America. People were pissed and said no President would do that.
Well it and everything else is too late to stop now as it is all to far along.

an average patriot said...

Anok did you see this? Amongst everything else he now has the poer to do this is unbelievable and deadly in this ifiots hands. Remember the FEMA concentration camps set up around the country? They are for us! pay particular attention to Executive Order #11004! take care and have a nice day!
The power to issue Executive Orders allows the President of the United States to unilaterally create law without congressional oversight and approval.

Col. James Ammerman, 40 years an Army Chaplain, gave a talk at The Granada Forum in southern California on March 20, 1997. He outlined the details of Executive Orders 10995 through 11005 as follows:

Executive Order #10995: Authorizes seizure of all communication equipment in the United States.

Executive Order #10997: Authorizes seizure of all electric power companies, fuels, fuel sources, and minerals (public and private)

Executive Order #10998: Authorizes seizure of all food supplies, food resources, all farms and all farm lands (public and private).

Executive Order #10999: Authorizes seizure of all means of transportation- including personal cars, trucks, or any type of vehicle; Total control over all highways, roads, seaports, and sea ways.

Executive Order #11000: Authorizes forced conscription of all Americans for work duties under supervision of Federal agents. This section also authorizes the splitting up of family units if deemed necessary by the government agencies in charge.

Executive Order #11001: Authorizes seizure of all health, education, and welfare facilities and their administrations (public and private).

Executive Order #11002: Empowers the Post Master General to register all men, women, and children in the United States for government purposes.

Executive Order #11003: Authorizes seizure of all airports and all aircraft, public, commercial, and private.

Executive Order #11004: Authorizes seizure of all housing and finance authorities and permits government agents to establish forced relocation sites. The government can declare any area of its choosing as "unsafe" and force the entire area to be abandoned of all persons. Authorizes establishment of new "relocation" communities; building new housing with public funds.

Executive Order #11005: Authorizes seizure of all railroads, inland waterways, and storage facilities, both public and private.

Executive Order #13010 (New): This Executive order is entitled Critical Infrastructure Protection. It established a commission made up of members from Federal government departments and agencies, which will be granted dictatorial powers when an emergency is declared.

Larry said...

A Newsweek story critical of Rep. Ron Paul and labeling the NAFTA Superhighway a baseless conspiracy theory has generated approximately 250 adverse reader responses on the "comments" section of Newsweek's website, many citing hard evidence that the proposed transcontinental trade corridor is quite real.

U.S. Rep. Ron Paul

"There is a broad coalition of Americans developing across the United States who are opposed to a North American Union and know that Ron Paul is right and we need to take action now before it is too late," Jesse Benton, national press secretary for the Ron Paul Presidential Campaign 08 told WND.

Particularly interesting among Newsweek's reader comments were citations of Canadian government websites that openly discuss and declare plans to create a NAFTA Superhighway.

Several readers pointed to a Canadian government video clip gaining wide circulation on the Internet. It involves a Nov. 20 "Speech from the Throne," in which John Harvard, lieutenant-governor of the Province of Manitoba, Canada, opened the second session of the 39th assembly of the provincial legislature with comments proclaiming support for the development of a "Mid-Continent Trade Corridor."

"Manitoba is also taking a major role in the development of a Mid-Continent Trade Corridor, connecting our northern Port of Churchill with trade markets throughout the central United States and Mexico," Harvard told the legislature.

"To advance the concept," Harvard continued, "an alliance has been built with business leaders and state and city governments spanning the entire length of the Corridor. When fully developed, the trade route will incorporate an 'inland port' in Winnipeg with pre-clearance for international shipping."

A video posted on YouTube shows excerpts from Harvard's speech juxtaposed with clips of President Bush and Canada's Prime Minister Stephen Harper at the press conference of the third summit of the Security and Prosperity Partnership in Montebello, Quebec, on Aug. 21, ridiculing the North American Union and the NAFTA Superhighway as baseless conspiracy theories.

A Destination-Winnipeg trade group website identifies the Mid-Continent Trade Corridor as "the northern gateway of this vast Corridor, a network of highways and railways linking the business community with cities to the south, through the U.S. and into Mexico."

The Canadian government's Canada Transport website describes the Mid-Continent International Trade Corridor as a rail and highway network which stretches from Manitoba to Mexico.

Other Newsweek readers provided links to an Alberta government website.

The Ministry of Infrastructure and Transportation in Alberta, Canada, has posted on its website a trade corridor map that shows a NAFTA Superhighway clearly designated in the same route, including Interstate Highways 35, 29 and 94, that the North America's SuperCorridor Coalition, or NASCO, designates as the I-35 NAFTA Superhighway.

Craig Offman of the National Post writes that this Alberta map of the NAFTA Superhighway on the Alberta Government website is currently Number Two on the popular U.S. web site

"Well, now, Mr. Paul might think he has some real fodder," Offman writees. "The Ministry of Infrastructure and Transportation website uses the exact phrase, showing a thoroughfare that begins in Manitoba and drops all the way down to West Texas."

"Why would the Canadian government web page in Alberta show a NAFTA Superhighway if the highway doesn't exist?" asks a Newsweek reader linking to the Alberta site. "Keep on lying to the people, Newsweek, it is what you do best."

"We have had that map with the NAFTA Superhighway on our website for 5 years or more," Jerry Bellikka, director of communications for the Alberta Ministry of Infrastructure and Transportation told WND in a telephone interview.

"The website is a site for truckers," Bellikka explained. "We try to harmonize our trucking regulations with Canada and the United States so truckers can log on and see where they fit on our requirements when they are traveling along these North American corridors."

WND asked Bellikka if the Alberta Ministry of Infrastructure and Transportation had any intention of changing the NAFTA Superhighway map on its website.

"No," Bellinkka answered directly. "We have no plan to change the designation of NAFTA Superhighway on our website."

Dave Dubya said...

Back to the CIA tape-gate for a minute. Here's a bit from the NY Times friday.

"Top C.I.A. officials had decided in 2003 to preserve the tapes in response to warnings from White House lawyers and lawmakers that destroying the tapes would be unwise, in part because it could carry legal risks, the government officials said.

But the government officials said that Jose A. Rodriguez Jr., then the chief of the agency’s clandestine service, the Directorate of Operations, had reversed that decision in November 2005, at a time when Congress and the courts were inquiring deeply into the C.I.A.’s interrogation and detention program. Mr. Rodriguez could not be reached Friday for comment.

Yeah, right, warnings from White House lawyers. Warnings to cover the Shrub's ass.

And what can we to expect for Rodriguez? Perhaps a Medal of Freedom? Maybe after his pardon and commutation.

an average patriot said...

Ron Paul is speaking out against the NAU? Good for him. It really angers me that everu time someone uncovers and speaks about the truth it is called a conspiracy and they are labeled as quacks. It will happen and as we discussed is well under way.
I was just preparing to poist an update you guys may find interesting. I just want to respond to Dave.

an average patriot said...

Dave even our friend Harriet Mairs told them not to destroy those tapes. You know the beehives destroyed them to cover their own terror called tirture. It peeves me that you can bet they will get aweay with this too.
I am going to post the update to this sory now. I have though been purposely ignoring the tapes because the chief asshole just says he doen't remember and nothing will get done here too. It drives me crazy knowing what he is preparing to do and appear to be forced to do it.

an average patriot said...

Larry I almost forgot. I feel like a traitor but Ron Paul is a Republican I could actually vote for. He is the anti Republican and does not stand a chance so we don't have to worry! He is the only republican you ever hear speaking his own mind and the truth.

Dave Dubya said...

Edwards has spoken out agains NAFTA for the right reasons.
From the Dec. 8th NY Times:

On the 14th anniversary of the North American Free Trade Agreement, Edwards planned to condemn the deal that lowered trade barriers between the United States and Canada and Mexico, arguing that it has paved the way for a series of deals that put the interests of multninational corporations ahead of working families.

''NAFTA was sold to the American people with promises that it would grow the economy and create millions of new jobs. But today, we know those promises were empty,'' he said in remarks prepared for delivery at a town hall forum in Derry. ''In all three countries, it has hurt workers and families while helping corporate insiders.''

The former North Carolina senator said more than 5 million American jobs have gone overseas since President Bush took office, and that up to 30 million more could follow in the next decade.

''The folks in Washington say that trade is good for the economy, even if it hurts a few 'losers,''' he said. ''That's the word they use, losers, and it tells you something about how they see regular American workers and families who are struggling to compete.''

Too bad Edwards has zero to no chance of being listened to.

Let's not forget the ugly side of Paul's Ayn Rand style of libertarianism. If he had his way we can kiss social security, medicare, and medicaid goodbye. The same with any environmental and corporate regulation. There would be no more employer-sponsered pensions.

These are all targets of Republicans anyway and soon will be history.They do not believe government is for the common good.

He would privatize EVERYTHING.

an average patriot said...

I am glad to hear that. Edwards adds credence to the fact that it is indeed happening but like everything els being done behind our backs underhandedly we will be powerless to stop this and the loss of our America as we race to world war.
Some States are trying to fight this including Canadians but it is clandestinely well underway and we will be powerless to stop this too but we must keep trying even if we are shovelling shit against the tide we must keep shovelling.

Anonymous said...

And what do you think of Obadiah Shoher's arguments against the peace process ( )?