"IT WASN'T MUSLIMS

With a peer-reviewed scientific journal having published "loaded gun" (i.e. unreacted nano-thermite) evidence finally proving beyond doubt that World Trade Center Buildings 1, 2 and 7 were brought down in a series of controlled demolitions, here are a few more facts to consider.

It wasn't Muslims in an Afghan cave who had access to highly energetic nano-thermites; it was the US military and government scientists such as those connected with NIST.

It wasn't Muslims who ran a construction company that was awarded a $124 million contract for construction of the Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) headquarters in Washington, DC, which oversees the Indian Head Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC-IH), which was described during the 1990s as the "National Center for Energetics", the military's term for "explosives work", and as of 1999-2000 the "only reliable source of aluminum nanopowders in the United States"; it was Tom Leppert who was CEO of Turner Construction as of 9/11/01, and who even writes parts of Presidential speeches.

It wasn't Muslims who ran a construction company that had supervised the 2000 demolition of the Seattle Kingdome, participated in the post 9/11 collection and disposal of the steel wreckage of the WTC towers, and carried out extensive renovations throughout the World Trade Center complex right up to the morning of 9/11 including fireproofing upgrades on the floors that were struck by planes and subsequently "failed", when the steel had already been certified to ASTM E119 by Universal Laboratories, and, in tests sponsored by NIST on corresponding floor assemblies subjected to greater heat exposure and protected with less fireproofing than was the case at the WTC, the test specimens "were able to sustain the maximum design load" without collapsing for as long as the tests were run (2 to 3 1/2 hours); it was Tom Leppert who was CEO of Turner Construction as of 9/11/01 and received a Torch of Conscience award from the American Jewish Congress.

It wasn't Muslims who trained their cameras on the World Trade Center Towers prior to the first aircraft impact, who danced and celebrated with high fives prior to the second impact as most onlookers still believed it had been a terrible accident rather than terrorism, and who were caught with foreign passports, $4,700 in cash hidden in a sock, maps highlighting certain places in the city, and a van that tested positive for traces of explosives; it was Israelis Sivan Kurzberg, Paul Kurzberg, Yaron Shmuel, Oded Ellner, and Omer Marmari, several of whom have been confirmed as Mossad agents, as part of their job in "documenting the event".

It wasn't Muslims who were caught on 9/11/01 operating in teams with vans full of explosives, including one team who attempted to blow up the George Washington Bridge with a truck packed with tons of explosives, and another who blew up a van between 6th and 7th on King Street with a mural painted of a remote controlled airplane diving into New York and blowing up; it was Israelis, which is why the authorities did their best to ignore and bury these reports which included a suspected van bomb driven into the WTC basement and exploded to weaken the structure.

It wasn't Muslims who were caught shortly after midnight on May 7, 2002 very close to the Whidbey Island Naval Air Station, Oak Harbor, Wash., (where the Navy conducts explosive ordnance training for bomb disposal mobile units to the consternation of local marine life) with a rental truck that tested positive for TNT and RDX plastic explosives; it was Israelis whose cover story was of "delivering furniture" but regarded by authorities as dubious because of the early morning hour, and the authorities' subsequent claim that the dog's reaction and initial tests for explosives were wrong is so full of holes that it merely demonstrates the power of the Israeli lobby.

It wasn't Muslims who were in New York on 9/11 and in London on the morning of the 7/7 attacks; it was Benjamin Netanyahu and Rudy Giuliani.

It wasn't Muslims who received advance warning of the London 7/7 attacks; it was Benjamin Netanyahu and the Mossad.

It wasn't Muslims who provided two hours' advance warning of an attack on the World Trade Center via an instant messaging company based in Herzliya; it was Israelis.

It wasn't a Muslim who fled the US on September 14, 2001; it was Dominick Suter of "Urban Moving Systems" who fled to Israel.

It wasn't over a hundred Muslims who, from around January 2000 to September 2001, posed as "art students" and attempted to penetrate US Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) offices and other federal buildings including 36 sensitive Department of Defense (DoD) sites, were caught with diagrams of the interior of federal buildings and photographs of federal agents and often evaded security by entering through back doors or parking garages, and even visited the homes of senior federal officials but not those of their neighbors; it was Israelis, none of whom were "art students" but many of whom had backgrounds in Israeli military intelligence. Not surprisingly, the Press went for a limited hangout by trying to pretend the Israelis were merely shadowing "Arab hijackers" and either failed to pass on information, or "it was not treated seriously", the old canard about "intelligence failure". The operations of the Israeli fake "art students" is well documented, including plenty of names and even descriptions. An unusually large number of these Israelis were located in Irving, Dallas, TX (p.23, previous link), which is about ten miles west of Tom Leppert's Alva Court home, which is barely more than a mile north of the Dallas home that George W. Bush moved into after leaving office.

It isn't Muslim countries that have a massive spy ring in the USA capable of tapping into much of the telecoms network and using information obtained to blackmail Americans; it is Israel.

It wasn't Muslims who received advance warning on Monday September 10, 2001, against flying the next day; it was San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown, and a group of top Pentagon officials.

It wasn't Muslims who acquired a 99-year lease on the World Trade Center's Twin Towers, Buildings Four and Five and approximately 400,000 square feet of retail space, and insured for billions of dollars against terror attacks a mere six weeks before terror attacks did in fact occur, and then employed (to press for the insurance claim) a 'structural engineer' who misleadingly asserts that steel loses half its strength at "400 degrees"; it was - in a deal negotiated by Lewis Eisenberg of the Port Authority - Benjamin Netanyahu's (and Ariel Sharon's and Ehud Barak's) friend Larry Silverstein and his partner Australian billionaire and "Holocaust survivor" Frank Lowy who fought "in the Jewish underground", was embroiled in a high-level bank corruption scandal with Israeli Premier Ehud Olmert and found to be making payments to Lord (Michael Abraham) Levy who was arrested several times in relation to a "cash for honors" scandal, Levy being a "tennis partner" and advisor of Tony Blair.

It isn't Muslims who have a reputation for perpetrating arson scams in order to claim off insurance companies as evidenced by any colloquial use of the term "Muslim lightning"; it is Jews as evidenced by the recognized term "Jewish lightning".

It wasn't Muslims who normally breakfasted at the Windows on the World restaurant on the 106th and 107th floors of the North Tower, but by some bizarre coincidence did not happen to be there on 9/11 and were thus spared the fate of occupants on that tragic day (none of whom escaped from the floors above the aircraft impact at 8:46 AM); it was Larry Silverstein who was spared due to having a "dermatologist's appointment", an event which also spared his two children who worked at Silverstein Properties.

It wasn't a Muslim who went on TV within hours of the attacks to tell everyone that "It... certainly has the fingerprints of somebody like bin Laden" and the World Trade Center had collapsed because of "the velocity of the plane" and "intense heat probably weakened the structure as well", and who reportedly on that very day advised the White House to take Cipro, an effective antibiotic against anthrax, seven days before the commencement of an anthrax letters terror campaign targeted at Democratic U.S. Senators and news media offices, who on 9/11/01 was a managing director of the crisis and consequence management group at Kroll Associates, who was an advisor to the Council of Foreign Relations (CFR) regarding "epidemiological surveillance" and national security advisor at the National Institute of Health (NIH), and who gave his 'friend' John O'Neill a job as Head Of Security at the World Trade Center; it was Jerome Hauer.

It wasn't Muslims who carried out a terror campaign mailing letters containing anthrax spores that had their electrostatic charge altered so that they would disperse more readily, anthrax that was traced to the weapons grade Ames strain originating at the US Army Medical Research Institute for Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) at Fort Detrick, neither was it the FBI's final "suspect" Roman Catholic Bruce Ivins, who, unlike the true perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks, had no motive to target news media and Opposition Senators and thereby scare them into uncritical acceptance of the "Arab hijackers" conspiracy theory. Ivins died of an overdose and alleged "suicide" in July 2008 after the FBI gave up attempting to pin the blame on Steven Hatfill because there was not a scintilla of evidence against him; a logical suspect is Philip M. Zack who left Fort Detrick under a cloud in December 1991 after having headed a clique calling itself the "Camel Club" that was racially harassing Egyptian-born Dr. Ayaad Assaad. Zack was found by a 1992 inquiry to have been caught on surveillance camera being let into a Fort Detrick lab building at 8:40 p.m. on Jan. 23, 1992 apparently by Dr. Marian Rippy, a lab pathologist and close friend of Zack. The inquiry also found someone had been in a lab late at night secretly conducting unauthorised research, evidently on anthrax believed to include the Ames strain. Nearly ten years on, during the week between 9/11 and the commencement of the anthrax campaign, the FBI received an anonymous letter attempting to frame Dr. Assaad as a "bioterrorist". The anthrax letters seemed contrived so as to appear to have been written by a Muslim, and a New York Times writer told of a "Mr. Z." who failed some FBI polygraph tests and was once caught with a girlfriend at Fort Detrick "surrounded only by blushing germs".

It wasn't a Muslim who was claimed to have been killed on the alleged American Airlines "Flight 77", to have lived at Silver Spring, Maryland (as did a certain Rabbi Dr. Dov Zakheim), and to have worked on top-secret "deep-black" projects at the Indian Head Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC-IH), a "renowned leader in energetics" which operates an "Energetics Manufacturing Technology Center", carries out "advanced research in energetic systems" and "absorbed the function of the closed Naval Ordnance Laboratory, formerly in White Oak, MD" which is a couple miles from Silver Spring; it was William E. Caswell.

It wasn't Muslims who were claimed to have been killed on the alleged "Flight 77" and who worked for government or defense, particularly the Navy; it was John Yamnicky who, strangely, for the first time did not tell his daughter that he was going on travel, and who, like William Caswell, had worked for the Navy on top-secret "black" projects. Others included Charles Burlingame, a former Navy fighter pilot who used to work in the section of the Pentagon that was hit and who had formulated a response for the eventuality of an airliner being flown into the Pentagon and whose daughter Wendy subsequently died in a "suspicious fire" at a 50-story high-rise in New Jersey in December 2006, Wilson "Bud" Flagg, a retired American Airlines pilot and Navy Admiral, Stanley Hall, an expert in anti-radar technology and a director of program management at Raytheon, Bryan Jack, a senior executive and top budget analyst who worked at the Pentagon, Chandler Keller, a Boeing propulsion engineer, Dong Lee, a Boeing engineer who worked for their Integrated Defense Systems and who had worked for the National Security Agency (NSA) for 14 years, Barbara Olson, CNN commentator and wife of the US Solicitor General who claimed to have received cell phone calls from "Flight 77", Ruben Ornedo, a Boeing propulsion / satellite communications engineer, Robert Penniger, an electrical engineer with BAE Systems, and another dozen alleged "Flight 77 passengers" who were linked to defense and government who, we are told, all just happened to be on this unusually low occupancy flight. These people, well loved and respected as honest, decent heroes, are the very sort of characters whose work could have been horrifically exploited without their knowledge, and whom the 9/11 perpetrators would need to eliminate to prevent them speaking out after the attacks.

It wasn't Muslims who profited by speculating on airline and insurance stocks in advance of 9/11; it was Israelis.

It wasn't Muslims who concocted a hoax about pork-swilling, money-eschewing, celibate, truthful, courageous, pro-animal rights, "devout Jews" who were "suicide hijackers / pilots", almost half of whom later turned up alive and well; it was Jews who concocted a hoax about drinking, gambling, strip joint-frequenting, womanizing, "devout Muslims" who were "suicide hijackers / pilots", almost half of whom later turned up alive and well.

It wasn't a Muslim who was a former unit team leader in an elite special forces unit and whose father was a senior aide, secretary and pallbearer to a man who in 1937 was commander of the Irgun Tzvai Leumi, a Jewish terrorist organization responsible for atrocities such as the King David Hotel bombing; it was Benjamin Netanyahu.

It wasn't a Muslim who was the mentor of Benjamin Netanyahu's father Benzion and who wrote a column in the Revisionist Zionist magazine Doar Hayom under the title "From the Notebook of a Fascist", praising Mussolini and referring to one-time commander of the Irgun Ze'ev (Vladimir) Jabotinsky as "our Duce"; it was Abba Ahimeir the founder of Revisionist Maximalism, a Jewish fascist ideology.

It wasn't Muslim terrorists who plotted to assassinate British foreign secretary Ernest Bevin; it was Jewish terrorists.

It wasn't Muslims who orchestrated, and whose operatives were caught red-handed in, a failed false-flag terrorist campaign in Egypt; it was Israel.

It wasn't Muslims who attacked the USS Liberty killing 34 Americans, and had the US President saying "I don't give a damn if every man drowns and the ship sinks. I don't want to embarrass our allies"; it was Israel.

It wasn't Muslims who were evacuated "apparently due to a specific security threat" in advance of the Amman, Jordan terror attacks on November 9, 2005 (9/11 by Israeli and European calendars), which included a blast at the Radisson hotel that was known to have emanated from a bomb hidden in a false ceiling, even though the official story held that it was really the work of "suicide bombers" and therefore by some bizarre coincidence the ceiling bomb must have been placed there previously by someone else; it was Israelis who were evacuated in advance of these attacks in which there were no Jewish casualties, most of the dead were Jordanian Sunni Muslims, two Israeli casualties were both Arabs, and five Palestinians died including Major-General Bashir Nafeh, the head of military intelligence in the West Bank.

It wasn't Muslims who were caught and arrested inside the Mexican Congress chamber on October 10, 2001 in possession of guns, grenades, dynamite, detonators and wiring while posing as "press photographers"; it was Mossad agent Salvador Guersson Smecke and Israeli illegal immigrant Saur Ben Zvi at the very time that Zionists would obtain maximum benefit from a false-flag terror attack that would mobilize support for the war on "Muslim terrorists" in Afghanistan that had been launched only three days previously.

It wasn't Muslims who were convicted and jailed for six months in 2004 for fraudulently attempting to obtain a New Zealand passport in the name of a tetraplegic man; it was Mossad agents Uriel Kelman and Eli Cara who were seeking to create a false identity for Zev Barkan.

It wasn't Muslims who claimed to know the identity of "suicide hijackers" Abdulaziz al-Omari and Saeed al-Ghamdi when, since individuals with the exact same names and other personal details such as birth date, place and occupation subsequently turned up alive and well, the population of Saudi Arabia in 1975 was 7,180,000 and even given a high annual birth rate of 30 per 1,000 and ignoring infant mortality the daily birth rate was only 590 and so it is highly improbable that individuals would share the exact same name, birth date, place and occupation, al-Omari's passport had been stolen in 1995 when his apartment was burgled in Denver, Colorado (a state where Mossad agents have been active), and only utter cretins would steal the identities of people with a different appearance but having their exact same name, place, date of birth and occupation, ergo those hypothetical "suicide hijackers" would have had entirely different names; it was the FBI who published a list claiming that the 9/11 perpetrators included Abdulaziz al-Omari and Saeed al-Ghamdi in addition to several others who had turned up alive and well, and even though the FBI admitted that some hijackers may have used stolen identities and that there is "no legal proof to prove the identities of the suicidal hijackers," they denied having misidentified the alleged "suicide hijackers" and refused to change the names, photographs or backgrounds on their list - albeit obfuscating and trying to cover themselves by including multiple spellings and aliases.

It wasn't Muslims who were behind a failed coup in Turkey; it was crypto-Jew and Mossad agent pseudo-Rabbi Tuncay Guney, who fled to Canada in 2004, and who in 2001 lived in New Jersey towns that were centers of activity for Mossad Urban Moving Systems operatives.

It wasn't Muslims who set up an "al Qaeda cell" in Palestine; it was the Israeli Mossad.

It wasn't Muslims who had established a reputation for having the capability to stage false-flag terror attacks, i.e., to target U.S. forces and make it look like the act of a third party, prior to 9/11; it was the Mossad.

It wasn't a Muslim who infiltrated the Pentagon and betrayed his country of birth by selling classified documents to another country that were then traded to the USSR; it was convicted spy Jonathan Pollard whose treachery resulted in stolen nuclear secrets being passed on to the USSR with Israel as the paying intermediary.

It wasn't Muslims who were running an exercise commencing at 9:00 a.m. on the morning of 9/11 involving a plane crashing into a tower; it was officials at the National Reconnaissance Office, Chantilly, VA.

It wasn't a Muslim who, in response to the question "Do the orders still stand?" regarding the response - or more precisely, the lack of response - to an aircraft that was rapidly homing in on the Pentagon and ten miles out after both of the Twin Towers had already been hit by planes more than half an hour previously, whipped his neck around and replied "Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?"; it was Dick Cheney.

It wasn't a Muslim who was CEO of a company that made remote control "Flight Termination Systems" that could electronically hijack in-flight aircraft and steer them into targets by means of a "Command Transmitter System"; it was Rabbi Dov Zakheim.

It wasn't a Muslim who, well aware that a percentage of trillions of dollars is still hundreds of billions of dollars, took a position as Comptroller of the Pentagon in May 2001 when it was already public knowledge that the Pentagon's accounting systems were in complete disarray with $6.9 trillion of "adjustments" having been required in an attempt to make the figures add up, and with no receipts for $2.3 trillion of these hard to track changes on non-integrated computer systems and antiquated paperwork that could be readily taken out by a missile or plane strike on the relevant auditing section at the Pentagon, and who subsequently delivered a commemorative sermon on the Pentagon lawn to hundreds of co-religionists from 40 countries six months after such a terror strike did in fact occur killing at least 34 budget analysts / accountants / financial experts; it was Rabbi Dov Zakheim.

It wasn't a Muslim who was at a breakfast meeting with Donald Rumsfeld when the first plane hit the WTC, and was at the Army Navy Country Club "when the plane that hit the Pentagon came right over the top of the Army Navy Club and bounced down the hill and hit the side of the Pentagon"; it was Thomas E. White, who is linked to the Enron fraud, who participated in JINSA trips to Israel, e.g. with his wife Susan in 1997, and who was sworn in as Secretary of the Army on May 31, 2001 which is 27 days after George W Bush appointed Rabbi Dov Zakheim as Undersecretary of Defense and Comptroller of the Pentagon, both White and Zakheim having been placed by Bush at the Pentagon where more than $2 trillion of transactions had no receipts and Pentagon finances were vulnerable to a "terror attack" that would target the appropriate auditing section.

--MORE--" (also continued below)

"IT WASN'T MUSLIMS

(continued from above)

It wasn't Muslims who in 2000 co-authored a document which called for a "new Pearl Harbor"; it was Roger Barnett, Alvin Bernstein, Stephen Cambone, Eliot Cohen, Devon Gaffney Cross, Thomas Donnelly, David Epstein, David Fautua, Dan Goure, Donald Kagan, Fred Kagan, Robert Kagan, Robert Killebrew, William Kristol, Mark Lagon, James Lasswell, I. Lewis Libby, Robert Martinage, Phil Meilinger, Mackubin Owens, Steve Rosen, Gary Schmitt, Abram Shulsky, Michael Vickers, Barry Watts, Paul Wolfowitz, and Rabbi Dov Zakheim.

It wasn't Muslims who had a motive for employing a "Flight Termination System" to take control of EgyptAir Flight 990 - a Boeing 767 - on October 31, 1999 (after a bizarre coincidence in which "air crash victims grief counselor" Ed McLaughlin of the Family Enterprise Institute was the only person to board the ill-fated plane in Los Angeles and get off at New York), send it plunging into the Atlantic 60 miles south of Nantucket killing all 217 on board, none of whom were Israelis but 33 of the casualties were Egyptian army officers including two Air Force brigadier generals and two army major generals, and promote the concept of "Muslim suicide pilots" to a gullible public; it was Jews who would have needed to conduct a trial run of electronically hijacking in-flight Boeing aircraft for their imminent false-flag terror operation that was to be blamed on "Muslim suicide pilots / hijackers", with the EgyptAir Flight 990 "inquiry" being overseen by Zionist Jew Bernard Loeb who had Jewish translators transcribe the cockpit recordings, and the FBI conducting a character assassination to smear the alleged "suicidal" co-pilot.

It wasn't Muslims who wrote in 1998 of a "transforming event" rather like "Pearl Harbor"; it was John Deutsch, Ashton Carter and Philip Zelikow.

It wasn't a Muslim who served as Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission, whose expertise and job entailed the creation and maintenance of public myths or "presumptions", and who confirmed that the Iraq war had been for Israel's benefit; it was Philip Zelikow.

It wasn't Muslims who published a paper in 1996 entitled A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm, which mentioned "removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq" and introduced the concept of pre-emptive strikes for which some phony pretext such as halting drug money or striking counterfeiting infrastructure or "weapons of mass destruction" could be devised that Americans would sympathise with; it was The Institute for Advanced Strategic & Political Studies (IASPS) of Jerusalem and Washington which, for new Israeli Premier Benjamin Netanyahu, discussed how such a policy would benefit Israel.

It wasn't a Muslim who, in a 1995 book, predicted that "if the West doesn’t wake up to the suicidal nature of militant Islam, the next thing you will see is militant Islam is bringing down the World Trade Center"; it was Benjamin Netanyahu.

It wasn't Muslim security officials who, in 1991, inspected the garage of a Muslim shipping company in the World Trade Center and concluded that the WTC garage was vulnerable to a car bomb, two years before the WTC garage was in fact hit by a car bomb and the FBI were aware of the plot yet let it go ahead killing six people and injuring more than a thousand, and ten years before the WTC was demolished one week after the very same shipping company had moved out of the WTC; it was Israeli security officials and an Israeli shipping company.

It wasn't Muslims who paid Ali al-Jarrah more than $300,000 for services rendered, i.e., posing as a "supporter" of the Palestinian cause while betraying his country to an enemy state, and who was a cousin of Ziad al-Jarrah who was alleged to be one of nineteen 9/11 "suicide hijackers"; it was Israel that paid this Mossad asset.

It wasn't Muslims who 1) broadcast the pilot episode on March 4, 2001 of The Lone Gunmen TV series, an episode about a plot by a secret cabal within the US government to electronically hijack by remote control a Boeing heading for Boston and divert it to crash into the World Trade Center 2) said in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks that no one had ever conceived of aircraft being used by terrorists as missiles to target buildings; it was 1) Fox TV, owned by Rupert Murdoch, a long-time friend of Benjamin Netanyahu 2) National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice / acting Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Richard Myers / President George W. Bush / Vice President Dick Cheney / White House spokesman Ari Fleischer.

It wasn't a Muslim who said he'd seen the (first) plane hit the (North) Tower and reckoned it must have been "one terrible pilot" and "a horrible accident" before going into a classroom and subsequently being informed of the second impact when the first impact was not broadcast live on TV; it was George W. Bush.

It wasn't Muslims who, on Tuesday, October 2 through Friday, October 5, 2001: 1) met with, and 2) received $3 million in gifts for "funds for victims" from Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifah Al-Thani, the Emir of Qatar who started the Al Jazeera channel in 1996 with a $150 million grant, the channel which broadcasts audios and videos purporting to be of "Osama bin Laden" aka Emmanuel Goldstein; it was: 1) George W. Bush, Dick Cheney (an "old friend") - Cheney also met the Emir on October 20, 2001 to discuss the "Osama" interviews, Rudy Giuliani, Colin Powell, Paul Wolfowitz, and Richard Myers 2) Rudy Giuliani, Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Myers.

It wasn't Muslims who fabricated a fairy story about Pfc. Jessica Lynch being ambushed, stabbed, shot, bravely continuing to shoot Iraqis, being abused, raped, and held captive in a hospital by Iraqi guards, and later rescued by elite US forces; it was "unnamed US officials" who lied, since in fact there was no "rescue", Lynch's gun had jammed with sand, she was being cared for by the Iraqis after being injured in a car crash, she had no "bullet holes" or "knife wounds", the hospital was not "under guard", and doctors had even tried to return Lynch to US forces themselves.

It wasn't Muslims who conspired to invade a defenseless nation by lying about "weapons of mass destruction" ("WMDs") when they had already made up their minds to invade for "regime change", resulting in excess Iraqi deaths estimated at 655,000 to one million, the displacement of more than four million, the sacrifice of thousands of troops and throwing away of $3 trillion to no avail save for enriching a few war criminals and profiteers to the tune of billions of dollars in this proxy war for Israel; it was George W. Bush and Tony Blair.

It wasn't a Muslim who ordered aides to plan for striking Iraq barely five hours after the Pentagon was attacked on 9/11; it was Donald Rumsfeld.

It wasn't Muslims who ordered 250 police to smash their way into a house in Forest Gate, London, in the middle of the night and arrest two brothers after shooting one of them in the shoulder, on the basis of intelligence said to be from a "reliable", single source regarding a conspiracy involving a "cyanide bomb", with the brothers being released without charge several days later before it was subsequently revealed that the source was a man with an IQ of 69 who was already in jail on a terror conviction; it was Jewish supremacist lackeys MI5, Tony Blair and John Reid.

It isn't Muslim countries that have hundreds of nuclear warheads and submarines equipped with cruise missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads with a 900-mile range; it is Israel.

It isn't Muslims that have a powerful political lobby capable of extorting vast sums; it is Israel.

It wasn't a Muslim who boasted "We Muslims control America, and the Americans know it"; it was Ariel Sharon who boasted "We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it".

It isn't Muslims who fake phony "hate crimes" against themselves, such as vandalising their own cars or graves, or poisoning their dogs and defacing their houses with swastikas, or cutting their clothes and drawing swastikas on their stomachs; it is Jews.

It wasn't Muslims who took control of The New York Times in 1896, or who indeed own and control much of the mainstream media today; it was and is Jews.

It isn't a Muslim country that crushes peace protesters to death with bulldozers or shoots them, or shells a picnicking family on a beach (and then refuses to own up) when it wants to launch a war within the next three weeks, or warns civilians to flee after blowing up bridges so it can target them like sitting ducks, or shoots at Red Cross ambulances or UN observers after promising they would be safe, or bombs a power station so that more than ten thousand tonnes of crude oil leaks into the Mediterranean as a "collective punishment"; it is Israel.

It isn't Muslims who routinely employ weapons such as phosphorus shells to inflict grave and horrific injuries on civilians, and who deliberately fire more than a million cluster bomblets of which 40% fail to detonate on impact and 90% are employed in the final three days before a ceasefire so they can "get them all in while the going is good"; it is Israel.

It isn't a Muslim nation that holds the world record for defying UN resolutions; it is Israel.

It wasn't Muslims who ganged up on a handicapped Jew for hiking on his own land, beat him with clubs, dragged him along the ground, tied him to a power pole and continued to beat and kick him as Muslim soldiers did nothing to stop it and police merely advised the thugs to pour water on the victim's head to wash away the blood before journalists and photographers arrived; it was a gang of four cowardly, bigoted Jewish settlers who beat up a handicapped Palestinian with impunity, basking in the knowledge that Jewish soldiers and police would not act impartially, and even returning a week later to torment the neighbors, ransacking their home and destroying their few possessions.

It wasn't Muslim soldiers who beat up and killed a Jew with clubs and rifle butts and kicks to the head and then, after an 'investigation', concluded that the soldiers had "acted properly"; it was the Israeli "Defense" Forces who smashed three holes in a Palestinian teenager's skull killing him as he merely waited at a bus stop, continuing to beat him as he lay unconscious, then made up a story about him "pulling a knife" and suggested that he was "mentally unstable" in a case that is sadly all too typical of violence perpetrated by racist, bigoted right-wing extremist Jewish supremacists upon those whom they perceive as "animals in human form".

It wasn't Muslims who created a global organization named the "Anti Defamation League" in order to defend Muslim criminals by playing the race card and accusing their pursuers of being "racists" and "anti-Semites" who were guilty of "hate crimes"; it was Jews who set up the Anti Defamation League of B'nai B'rith in response to the lynching of Leo Frank, president of the Atlanta chapter of the B'nai B'rith Jewish secret society who had been convicted of murdering 13-year-old Mary Phagan who worked at Frank's pencil factory, with the lynching of Frank being in response to the commuting of his death sentence to life imprisonment after organized Jewry had tried to cast doubt on Frank's conviction by shifting the blame to a black man even though ritual murder is a known Jewish tradition, the ADL being used thereafter to denounce anti-criminals as "anti-Semites" whenever the criminals happened to be Jews.

It isn't Muslims who, for political and financial gain, demolished the World Trade Center with nano-thermite and crashed remote-controlled planes into it in order to set up a hoax about "Jewish kamikaze pilots" and then attempt to throw researchers off the scent by pretending to "investigate" the demolitions whilst 'accidentally' plumping for the wrong hypothesis (e.g. H-bombs rather than thermite), and then stubbornly refuse to change to a hypothesis that is in accordance with the evidence; it is Jews who set up a hoax about "Muslim kamikaze pilots" and have their deliberately misleading 'work' about the demolitions hosted at sites that are owned and edited by Jews.

It wasn't Muslims who practised pseudo-science by refusing to look for Iron Blue at Auschwitz or explosives at the World Trade Center, in order that their 'investigation' would come up with the required financially and politically motivated result; it was Jan Markiewicz, Wojciech Gubala, and Jerzy Labedz of the Jan Sehn Institute at Krakow (Auschwitz fraud), and "scientists" and "engineers" at NIST (WTC fraud).

It wasn't Muslims who took over the "investigation" of the World Trade Center collapses when FEMA were making a hash of the cover up, mixed up Figures 11-51 and 11-52 in NCSTAR1-9Vol2 on their WTC7 report which was published two days after the mysterious death of eyewitness Barry Jennings whose testimony of explosions in WTC7 before either Tower had collapsed - note he specifically says (4:43) "I was trapped in there when both buildings came down" - blew their politically motivated assumptions and conclusions apart, failed to spot their mistake in their accompanying description, assumed unrealistically high gas temperatures in order to derive their required unrealistically high steel temperatures, published a preposterous hypothesis of a "thermal-expansion"-based collapse with the logical conclusion that the 180 kip shear capacity of four bolts in a seated connection would be exceeded if the steel heated up from 20 C to 32 C making the force to completely resist the thermal expansion 191 kip, irrespective of the fact that no steel-framed high-rises had ever collapsed due to "fires" or "impacts" apart from the three that allegedly did so on 9/11, claimed inward bowing of the WTC1 perimeter columns between floors 94 to 100 peaking at 55 inches at column 316 on the 96th floor which could not be reconciled with the fact that the columns' moment of inertia or second moment of area was at least 342 ins^4 along the minor axis and a maximum deflection of 55 inches given fixed - fixed boundary conditions and a distributed load would have required the failure within 102 minutes of at least ten consecutive floors, many of which did not have any fireproofing 'dislodged' by a plane and did not even experience substantial fires; it was NIST, whose top scientists and engineers have extensive knowledge of nano-thermites, but said they had found "no evidence" of explosives at the WTC and later admitted that they had not bothered to look for any. The 9/11 perpetrators had to ensure those in charge of the "investigation" were aware of that which they must not find.

It wasn't a Muslim who announced on Sunday September 16, 2001 that a "hijacker's passport" (allegedly that of Satam al Suqami) had been found "several blocks from the ruins of the World Trade Center", with other reports asserting that the passport was found "in the vicinity of Vesey Street"; it was former Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik who was indicted November 2007 on multiple counts including lying, fraud and conspiracy, which is consistent with the fact that the laws of aerodynamics dictate that the passport should have been found in the vicinity of Liberty Street, the scriptwriter forgot that Suqami was supposed to be on Flight AA11 approaching from the north, and, of several attempts made by the authorities to guess where the passport should have been found, not one of them was correct!

It wasn't Muslims who had JFK killed; it was Jews.

It wasn't Muslims who stole elections by exploiting electronic voting machines that biased the results such that the odds for several swing states to swing as much as they did from the exit polls was 250 million to one against; it was George W. Bush.

It isn't Muslims who exhibit traits of supremacist megalomaniacs by referring to their enemies as "grasshoppers", "beasts", "crocodiles" and "cockroaches"; it is Jews.

It wasn't a Muslim who set up a Ponzi scheme that netted $50 billion; it was a Jew.

It wasn't Muslims who made a record about doing "The Wall Street Shuffle" and whose other songs included scatological references; it was Jews.

It isn't Muslims who rule the world by proxy and get others to fight and die for them in wars; it is Jews, whose modus operandi is to select rich host populations that will let them in, pose as their "ally" whilst draining them of hard-earned wealth, employ deception to trick the hosts into fighting poorer nations, and reap the spoils of war such as Afghan opium trafficking, missing Pentagon funds, looting of oil-for-food funds, etc, along with other opportunistic scams such as the $550 billion electronic run on the banks. Note: some reports incorrectly state Thursday September "15", 2008 for the latter; it should of course be September 11, the Thursday prior to September 15.

It isn't Muslims who have been expelled from countries on numerous occasions, it is Jews who keep getting kicked out as soon as the host gets wise to the fact that Jews' only loyalty is to their own tribe, rather than the host nation to whom Jews pose as an "ally".

It wasn't Muslims who started a World War in 1914 in the hope that they could successfully launch a hoax about "six million" of their number being killed in order to obtain their own country and net a substantial fraction of global wealth in "reparations", failed, but also exploited the opportunity to annex and loot Russia and indulge in horrific blood-letting and oppression as a means of settling old scores with the Rus who had chased them westwards from former Khazaria; it was Khazar (fake) 'Jews'.

It wasn't Muslims who blew up Francois Duprat's car killing him and maiming his wife, beat up Dr. Robert Faurisson at least ten times in which his jaw was broken / teeth knocked out / nearly killed several times / hospitalized for weeks and was persecuted in legal battles and had his home raided by police, tried to kill Ernst Zundel on at least three occasions in arson and pipe bomb attacks and had him and Germar Rudolf deported to Germany and jailed for years, beat Jurgen Rieger unconscious and blew up his car, beat up David Cole and threatened to kill him and his family, persecuted and beat Joseph Burg, attacked Frank Walus seven times and nearly killed him in an acid attack, forced Ivan Lagace to resign from his job as a crematory expert after endless threats from thugs claiming to be from the Jewish Defense League, perpetrated numerous terrorist attacks in France including sulfuric acid sprayed into faces / attacks with iron bars / baseball bats / gas sprayed / excrement strewn around, had historian David Irving spend 400 days in jail before being released on Appeal from a three year sentence which was for two speeches and a newspaper interview he gave 16 years earlier, had Dr. Frederick Toben jailed in Germany for ten months for using his Australian website to express his views, and who had dozens more jailed, fined, and financially ruined by character assassination and legal battles; it was Jews attempting to prop up their idiosyncratic brand of "truth" which profited them handsomely for decades.

It wasn't Muslims who fabricated a hoax about "six million" of their people being "murdered" involving an evidence-free conspiracy theory about a plot to exterminate them in "gas chambers" which netted them - by way of a huge, illegitimate land grab - their own sovereign state, colossal profits in "reparations", hundreds of billions of dollars in foreign "aid" and "loan guarantees" and waiving / subsidizing of interest payments, etc, and now serves as their "sword and shield" to practice apartheid and kill and oppress their enemies with impunity; it was Jews.

It wasn't Muslims who were caught red-handed forging fake "smoke" onto wartime photographs of Auschwitz; it was the Simon Wiesenthal Center, whose suitability as guardians of truth is comparable to a choice of Count Dracula as a maintainer of blood banks.

It isn't Muslim mathematics that holds that the sum of a set of variables a + b + c + d + e... remains constant, e.g. at "six million", when several variables fluctuate downwards by, say, nearly three million and about half of that, in the absence of any corresponding upwards revision; it is financially and politically motivated Jewish "mathematics".

It isn't Muslim physics and chemistry that holds that corpses may be rapidly and economically cremated with between a pound and a kilogram of coke per body when the firebricks of the cremation ovens are not even replaced after some 20,000 cremations (which is rather like expecting a Trabant to be capable of doing 100,000 miles non-stop at 100 mph on 100 gallons of gasoline and a couple of cans of motor oil); it is politically and financially motivated Jewish "physics" and Jewish "chemistry".

It wasn't Muslims - or even the "Russian police" - who behave as if they authored The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion; it is International Jewry, and if it hisses like a snake and rattles like a rattlesnake, it isn't exactly benign.

It is not the "international Muslim" who has much to answer for; it is the international Jew.

The mainstream media’s conspicuous silence over the collapse of the official 9/11 conspiracy theory has clearly exposed them as "the dogs that didn’t bark".

This was inspired by an excellent piece from back in November 2003: It Wasn't Arabs by Edgar J. Steele

--MORE--"

Related: More Malware Targeting Users of Pirated Software for Mac

"CIA/MOSSAD GENERATED "VERIFY YAHOO ACCOUNT" SCAM/PHISHING/VIRUS

"The Mossad’s Infiltration Of America

Bt Br Nathanael Kapner

Real Jew News

THE MOSSAD PRIDES ITSELF ON DEEP infiltration & penetration into every ‘Muslim’ militant group in the world. Thus any media-hyped ‘terrorist’ attack reported by the Jewish occupied press is doubtless a Mossad operation.

All of the Mossad-engineered ‘terrorist’ attacks benefit the Jews since it galvanizes the Western world into making Israel’s enemies their own - and gives Israel a free hand in dealing with the Palestinians who are looked upon as enemies of the world.

The infiltration of the Mossad into the US political & military infrastructure had its greatest impetus in the 1980’s during the Reagan & Bush Sr administrations. 3 Zionist Jews with close ties to the Mossad held influential offices in the Pentagon during this period:

--MORE--"

"Financial intelligence uncovers foreign espionage in Canada An unnamed foreign government has been orchestrating espionage activities in Canada over the past year, according to a report tabled in Parliament Thursday.

I don't know; you decide:

"Attorney general collapses giving speech; he's alert in hospital

(CNN) -- U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey collapsed while giving a speech Thursday at the Federalist Society dinner at the Marriott Wardman Park Hotel in Washington....

Mukasey, 67, was giving a spirited defense of the Bush administration's legal policies when his speech began to slur and he lost track of his thoughts about 30 minutes into his talk. Seconds later, he became rigid and then began to slump.... During his speech, he praised the administration for "nothing less than a fundamental reorganization of our government" after the 9/11 terrorist attacks and blasted the "relentless critics of the very policies that have kept us safe....

--MORE--"

Coincidence?

Look, maybe the government and MSM can lie about 9/11; however, God is omnipotent so HE KNOWS!!!

Maybe this will get him to back of the tyrannical spying and data-mining:

"Verizon Says Employees Hacked Obama's Account

by Chloe Albanesius

Several Verizon Wireless employees gained unauthorized access to the cell phone account of President-elect Barack Obama, the provider revealed Thursday.

"This week we learned that a number of Verizon Wireless employees have, without authorization, accessed and viewed President-elect Barack Obama's personal cell phone account," Verizon said in a Thursday statement.

Why? Telecoms have immunity, so why don't the workers?

Verizon said the account has been inactive for several months and was tied to a flip phone, not a smart phone like the BlackBerry. Obama has been pictured several times talking on a Motorola Razr, a flip phone that is available through Verizon Wireless. Obama has also been spotted with the BlackBerry and the Apple iPhone.

--MORE--"

Here is something else to consider: How Israel helps eavesdrop on US citizens

I guess we know who was listening, hmmm?

Related: Operation FALCON: Federal and Local Cops Organized Nationally

NSPD-51 and the Potential for a Coup d’état by National Emergency

"ARE YOU ON THE LIST?

The federal government has been developing a highly classified plan that will override the Constitution in the event of a major terrorist attack (Photo: Illustration by Brett Ryder)

Planning to shut it down, are they?

"Attacks on websites growing in severity; Often, the targets are e-commerce firms, report says" by John Markoff, New York Times News Service  |  November 10, 2008

SAN FRANCISCO - Attackers bent on shutting down large websites - even the operators that run the backbone of the Internet - are arming themselves with what are effectively vast digital fire hoses capable of overwhelming the world's largest networks, according to a new report.

In these attacks, computer networks are hijacked to form so-called botnets that spray random packets of data in huge streams over the Internet. The deluge is meant to bring down websites and entire corporate networks. Known as distributed denial of service, or DDOS, attacks, they are routinely used during political and military conflicts, as in Estonia in 2007 during a political fight with Russia, and in the Georgian-Russian war last summer. Such attacks are also being used in blackmail schemes and political conflicts, as well as for general malicious mischief. 

Yeah, about those cyber attacks in Georgia:

"the command and control server that directed the attack, which was based in the United States had gone online several weeks before it began the assault..... a control computer that was based in the United States"

A survey of 70 of the largest Internet operators in North America, South America, Europe, and Asia found that malicious attacks were rising sharply and that the individual attacks were growing more powerful and sophisticated, according to the Worldwide Infrastructure Security Report. This report is produced annually by Arbor Networks, a company in Lexington, Mass.

********

Large network operators that run the backbone of the Internet have tried to avoid the problem by building excess capacity into their networks, said Edward G. Amoroso, chief security officer at AT&T. He likened the approach to a large shock absorber, but said he still worried about the growing scale of the attacks.  "It works, but it's not going to work if there's some Pearl Harbor event," he said.

--more--"

And just WHERE have we heard THAT TERM before, 'eh? 

Beware, America!  Something is coming down the pike. The government and MSM keep telegraphing it!!

"....

Where once Americans prided themselves on never starting wars, but rather accepting them if no other option were available, Bush seemed too eager to fight in Iraq. 

Americans love to lie to themselves about history, don't they?  Never started any wars!  Tell it to the Mexicans, Nicaraguans, and the Vietnamese (for starters)!

Where Americans prided themselves on their defense of religious freedom, Bush seemed too willing to advertise his Christianity.

Notice how Zionism and its control over our society never enters the equation?

Where Americans valued their civil liberties, Bush believed people would accept electronic surveillance as a means to root out terrorists.

Haven't we?  We will never even know the scale of the spying (something Obama will continue) because of telecom immunity.

And where Americans prided themselves on their humanity, Bush seemed too willing to excuse alleged torture of prisoners in American custody.

For more on the abominable atrocity of U.S. torture, go HERE

--link--"

And he didn't even touch upon the economy: Obama On Board

"If I Were A Terrorist"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1EXKLVgEx0

"This is a shocking invasion of the governor's privacy and a violation of law" -- the McCain campaign said in a statement yesterday."

Yeah, well, NOW YOU KNOW HOW WE FEEL, so SHOVE YOUR SPYING PROGRAM!!!!

"What does Sarah Palin have to hide in her Yahoo e-mails?

Some adolescent criminal (in mentality if not age) yesterday hacked into a Yahoo account used by Sarah Palin for both personal and business email, and various sites -- including Gawker -- posted some of the emails online. While the bottom layers of the right-wing noise machine (the kind that make you run for the shower after reading them) are moronically describing the hacker(s) as "liberals" and "left-wing," nobody actually has any idea of their identity, let alone their political leanings (if any). The available evidence strongly suggests the hacker is loosely part of an assorted band of Internet pranksters ranging from the juvenile to the psychopathic. Conventional political agendas ("Vote Obama!") don't exactly appear to be their interest. Either way, whoever did this committed a serious crime -- it's rather revolting to see screen shots of someone's inbox splattered across the Internet -- and the hacker should be apprehended and prosecuted.

Still, it's really a wondrous, and repugnant, sight to behold the Bush-following lynch mobs on the Right melodramatically defend the Virtues of Privacy and the Rule of Law. These, of course, are the same authoritarians who have cheered on every last expansion of the Lawless Surveillance State of the last eight years -- put their fists in the air with glee as the Federal Government seized the power to listen to innocent Americans' telephone calls; read our emails; obtain our banking, credit card, and library records; and create vast data bases of every call we make and receive and every prescription we fill and every instance of travel and other vast categories of information that remain largely unknown -- all without warrants or oversight of any kind and often in clear violation of the law.

The same political faction which today is prancing around in full-throated fits of melodramatic hysteria and Victim mode (their absolute favorite state of being) over the sanctity of Sarah Palin's privacy are the same ones who scoffed with indifference as it was revealed during the Bush era that the FBI systematically abused its Patriot Act powers to gather and store private information on thousands of innocent Americans; that Homeland Security officials illegally infiltrated and monitored peaceful, law-abiding left-wing groups devoted to peace activism, civil liberties and other political agendas disliked by the state; and that the telephone calls of journalists and lawyers have been illegally and repeatedly monitored.

And the same Surveillance State Worshipper leading today's screeching -- Michelle Malkin -- spent the last several years deriding those who objected to the President's illegal spying program as "privacy crusaders" and "constitutional absolutists" and "civil liberties absolutists".

Shouldn't these same people be standing up today and insisting that if Sarah Palin has done nothing wrong, then she should have nothing to hide? If Sarah Palin isn't committing crimes or consorting with The Terrorists, then why would she care if we can monitor her emails? And if private companies such as Yahoo can access her emails -- as they can -- then she doesn't really have any "privacy" anyway, so what's the big deal if others read through her communications, too? Isn't that the authoritarian idiocy that has been spewed since The Day That 9/11 Changed Everything -- beginning with the Constitution -- to justify vesting secret and unchecked surveillance powers in our Great and Good Leaders?

--MORE--"

You could be for just reading this...

"For decades the federal government has been developing a highly classified plan that would override the Constitution in the event of a terrorist attack. Is it also compiling a secret enemies list of citizens who could face detention under martial law?

by Christopher Ketcham

".... According to a senior government official who served with high-level security clearances in five administrations, "There exists a database of Americans, who, often for the slightest and most trivial reason, are considered unfriendly, and who, in a time of panic, might be incarcerated. The database can identify and locate perceived 'enemies of the state' almost instantaneously." He and other sources tell Radar that the database is sometimes referred to by the code name Main Core. One knowledgeable source claims that 8 million Americans are now listed in Main Core as potentially suspect. In the event of a national emergency, these people could be subject to everything from heightened surveillance and tracking to direct questioning and possibly even detention....

Let's imagine a harrowing scenario: coordinated bombings in several American cities culminating in a major blast—say, a suitcase nuke—in New York City. Thousands of civilians are dead. Commerce is paralyzed. A state of emergency is declared by the president. Continuity of Governance plans that were developed during the Cold War and have been aggressively revised since 9/11 go into effect. Surviving government officials are shuttled to protected underground complexes carved into the hills of Maryland, Virginia, and Pennsylvania. Power shifts to a "parallel government" that consists of scores of secretly preselected officials. (As far back as the 1980s, Donald Rumsfeld, then CEO of a pharmaceutical company, and Dick Cheney, then a congressman from Wyoming, were slated to step into key positions during a declared emergency.) The executive branch is the sole and absolute seat of authority, with Congress and the judiciary relegated to advisory roles at best. The country becomes, within a matter of hours, a police state....

In the days after our hypothetical terror attack, events might play out like this: With the population gripped by fear and anger, authorities undertake unprecedented actions in the name of public safety. Officials at the Department of Homeland Security begin actively scrutinizing people who—for a tremendously broad set of reasons—have been flagged in Main Core as potential domestic threats. Some of these individuals might receive a letter or a phone call, others a request to register with local authorities. Still others might hear a knock on the door and find police or armed soldiers outside. In some instances, the authorities might just ask a few questions. Other suspects might be arrested and escorted to federal holding facilities, where they could be detained without counsel until the state of emergency is no longer in effect.

--MORE--"

"Former Phone Chief Says Spy Agency Sought Surveillance Help Before 9/11" by SCOTT SHANE

The phone company Qwest Communications refused a proposal from the National Security Agency that the company’s lawyers considered illegal in February 2001, nearly seven months before the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, the former head of the company contends in newly unsealed court filings....

But the documents unsealed Wednesday in federal court in Denver, first reported in The Rocky Mountain News on Thursday, claim for the first time that pressure on the company to participate in activities it saw as improper came as early as February, nearly seven months before the terrorist attacks.

The significance of the claim is hard to assess, because the court documents are heavily redacted and N.S.A. officials will not comment on the agency’s secret surveillance programs. Other government officials have said that the agency’s eavesdropping without warrants began only after Sept. 11, 2001, under an order from President Bush.

But the court filings in Mr. Nacchio’s case illustrate what is well known inside the telecommunications industry but little appreciated by the public: that the N.S.A. has for some time worked closely with phone companies, whose networks carry the telephone and Internet traffic the agency seeks out for intercept.

In support of Mr. Nacchio’s accusations, his lawyers quoted from one of several lawsuits filed against telecommunications companies, accusing them of violating their customers’ privacy. That lawsuit, filed last year against several companies, asserts that seven months before the Sept. 11 attacks, at about the time of Mr. Nacchio’s meeting at the N.S.A., another phone company, AT&T, “began development of a center for monitoring long distance calls and Internet transmissions and other digital information for the exclusive use of the N.S.A.”

The lawsuit contends that the center would “give the N.S.A. direct, unlimited, unrestricted and unfettered access” to phone call information and Internet traffic on AT&T’s network."

--more--"

Part of a continuing series of excerpts from "The Revolution: A Manifesto."

"Freedom means not only that our economic activity ought to be free and voluntary, but that the government should stay out of our personal affairs as well. In fact, freedom means that we understand liberty as an indivisible hole. Economic freedom and personal liberty are not divisible. How do you plan to exercise your right to free speech if you're not allowed the economic freedom to acquire the supplies necessary to disseminate your views? Likewise, how can we expect to enjoy privacy rights if our property rights are insecure?

Government should respect our right to privacy, rather than invading it on phony pretenses. It should observe traditional legal norms when dealing with criminal suspects. And instead of trying to correct our bad habits at the point of a gun, it should defer to families and the normal channels of civil society to instruct people in moral conduct.

The war on terror has awakened more Americans than ever to the way the government exploits fear, and even its own failures, to justify eroding our civil liberties. Examples are all too plentiful. For instance, only well after the fact did Americans discover that their government had been defying the law by carrying out warrantless surveillance of Americans' international telephone conversations. After sitting on the story for a year, the New York Times went public with the program in December 2005.

That in itself should give us pause: why, in a free society with a supposedly independent media, did arguably the most influential newspaper in the United States keep Americans in the dark about a program like this?

The answer we were given involved unspecified national security concerns that the Times supposedly did not want to jeopardize. But that explanation does not hold water at all. We may safely assume that terrorists are clever enough to realize that our government is listening in on their conversations, even without the Times telling them so. The very name of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978 is a dead giveaway.

As far as we have been told, the only way that this program, administered by the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA), diverged from previous intelligence efforts is that this one operated without FISA warrants -- warrants issued in secret by special courts, in conformity with the 1978 Act. Awareness of this aspect of the program would have done nothing to aid terrorists. FISA warrants are issued in secret anyway, so neither under FISA nor under the NSA program would a terrorist know for sure that the government was eavesdropping on his conversations.

It looks very much like the old story: the government says "national security" and the natural and normal skepticism that our Founding Fathers taught us to have toward the government is promptly abandoned. The simple and straightforward reason the executive branch wanted the program kept secret, its consistent obfuscation notwithstanding, seems to be that it violated the law.

The reasons we were given for why the program was necessary were at least as unconvincing as the Times's defense of concealing it. On the other hand, we were told that the only targets of the program were people with links to terrorist organizations like al-Qaeda. At the same time, we were told that the sheer number of targets made FISA warrant applications impracticable.

I believe that constitutional lawyer Glenn Greenwald has identified a fatal contradiction in these claims. If it is true that the executive branch knew the locations of so many people with al Qaeda links, why were they seeking to merely eavesdrop on their conversations? Why were they not arresting them instead?

This, after all, is an administration that has detained people indefinitely, without charges, on the basis of sometimes shaky evidence of an al Qaeda connection. This time, we are supposed to believe the administration had knowledge of countless al Qaeda figures and decided to let them remain free? Not plausible, and that is why it seems likely that the targets of this surveillance included many Americans who had no ties to al Qaeda or terrorism at all.

Then we were told that the program wasn't lawless after all -- the president had been given this authority by Congress in the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF) that authorized military action in Afghanistan. It seems dubious that anyone in Congress at the time interpreted the AUMF as giving the president the power to engage in warrantless wiretapping in contravention of established law. According to Bruce Fein, deputy attorney general under President Reagan, that interpretation of AUMF would mean that it was also intended to authorize the president to "break and enter homes, open mail, torture detainees, or even open internment camps for American citizens in violation of federal statutes in order to gather foreign intelligence." It is not plausible to suggest that Congress would have intended to authorize such extreme measures by silence or remote implication. If this interpretation of AUMF were correct, moreover, parts of the Patriot Act would have been unnecessary. Finally, given that FISA, the existing law, deals explicitly and specifically with intelligence gathering, FISA would automatically trump AUMF as a matter of legal principle, even if the administration's interpretation were correct.

The administration itself didn't seem to take this argument seriously. When asked why, if the administration considered FISA inadequate to its purposes, it had not sought to amend it, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales frankly testified that they didn't think they would be able to win congressional approval for amendments to FISA. So they proceeded with the program anyway. That's problematic enough, but it also contradicts administration claims that AUMF gave them all the authority they needed. Why did they consider amending FISA in order to give themselves a power they supposedly already had?

Then, in yet another twist, we were told that NSA was carrying out what is known as "data mining," which amounts to combing through the communications of all Americans, and FISA could not accommodate this. Well, no, I should think not.

Finally, there is the argument that the president needs to be able to act with dispatch in order to pursue the targets he seeks. This argument also fails to persuade -- existing law was extremely accommodating on this score, allowing for warrantless surveillance for days at a time in emergency situations.

What was the real reason for the program, then? Who was targeted and why? No answers to these questions have been forthcoming. Bland assurances that our leaders are trustworthy and good, and would never abuse powers they have secretly exercised in defiance of the law, can hardly be taken seriously by those who believe in a free society. Remember Jefferson's cautionary words about confidence in men: we should be on our guard against our government officials, binding them down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution. Government surveillance of individuals has been abused in the past, and it has targeted political opponents and the politically unpopular. That's why the safeguards that were flaunted here were established in the first place. Frank Church, who served as a U.S. senator from Idaho for a quarter of a century and who investigated and led the charge for reform of the surveillance powers of American intelligence agencies, was observing as early as 1975 that the NSA, if it fell into the wrong hands, could enable the government "to impose a total tyranny, and there would be no way to fight back."

This particular program was known as the Terrorist Surveillance Program, and it received a great deal of attention after its existence became public. What was frequently overlooked amid the ensuing controversy was that the executive branch apparently carried out even more invasive activities, but we never got any answers about those.

When asked whether they had engaged in domestic wiretapping or carried out warrantless searches of people's homes or correspondence, officials have responded with carefully worded assurances that these things were not done under the program then under discussion -- i.e., the Terrorist Surveillance Program. But were these things being done pursuant to some other program? No answer.

When then Attorney General Alberto Gonzales testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee in February 2006, for example, he dealt with questions about whether the administration had engaged in warrantless wiretapping of purely domestic calls. "Not under the program in which I am testifying," came the reply. Such activity, the attorney general said, was "beyond the bound of the program which I'm testifying about today."

We do know that for some period of time between September 11, 2001, and March 2004, the executive branch was engaged in a kind of surveillance that was so at odds with American law that then Attorney General John Ashcroft, FBI Director Robert Mueller, and Deputy Attorney General James Comey threatened to resign if it continued. What exactly was the executive branch up to that caused so much dissent even among its own loyalists? Who was victimized during this time? Why are we not hearing the answers -- or even the questions?

The misnamed Patriot Act, presented to the public as an antiterrorism measure, actually focuses on American citizens rather than foreign terrorists. The definition of "terrorism" for federal criminal purposes is greatly expanded, such that legitimate protest against the government could someday place an American under federal surveillance. Similarly, your Internet provider can be forced to hand over user information to law enforcement without a warrant or subpoena.

The biggest problem with these new law enforcement powers is that they bear little relationship to fighting terrorism. Surveillance powers are greatly expanded, and checks and balances on government are greatly reduced. "Sneak and peek" and blanket searches are becoming more frequent every day. Most of the provisions have been sought by domestic law enforcement agencies for years, not to fight terrorism but rather to increase their police power over the American people.

The federal government has not shown us that it failed to detect or prevent the September 11 attacks because it lacked the powers over our lives that it was granted under the Patriot Act.

We now know that plenty of red flags that should have alerted officials to the hijackers plot were ignored. That was a matter of government ineptness, not a lack of surveillance power. Our officials had the evidence. they simply failed to act on it. And they then turned around and exploited their own failure as an excuse to crack down on the American people, demanding new powers that would have done nothing to prevent 9/11. Only government could get away with such a transparent sham.

The Patriot Act violates the Constitution by allowing searches and seizures of American citizens and their property without a warrant issued by an independent court upon a finding of probable cause. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Courts, whose standards do not meet the constitutional requirements of the Fourth Amendment, may issue warrants for individual records, including medical and library records. It can do so secretly, and the person who turns over the records is muzzled and cannot ever speak of the search. The attorney general is given the power, with no judicial oversight, to write "national security letters" ordering holders of any of your personal records to hand them over for the government to examine -- a power that has already been abused. You would have no way of knowing that this had been done.

Requiring a showing of probable cause before a warrant may be issued would in no way hamper terrorist investigations. For one thing, federal authorities still have plenty of tools available to investigate and monitor the activities of noncitizens suspected of terrorism. Second, restoring Fourth Amendment protections would not interfere with those provisions of the Patriot Act that remove the firewalls that once prevented the government's law enforcement and intelligence agencies from sharing information.

The probable cause requirements will likewise not delay a terrorist investigation. Preparations can be made for the issuance of a warrant in the event of an emergency, and allowances can be made for cases in which law enforcement does not have time to obtain a warrant. In fact, a requirement that law enforcement demonstrate probable cause may help law enforcement officials focus their efforts on true threats, thereby avoiding the problem of information overload that is handicapping the government's efforts to identify sources of terrorist financing.

History demonstrates that the powers we give the federal government today will remain in place indefinitely. How sure are we that future presidents won't abuse those powers? Politically motivated IRS audits and FBI investigations have been used by past administrations to destroy political enemies. Past abuses of executive surveillance are the reason FISA was passed in the first place.

Even some oof the most ardent supporters of the current wave of federal privacy violations and assaults on civil liberties once held -- when Bill Clinton was calling for them, at least -- that these powers were too dangerous to entrust to government. John Ashcroft, attorney general for several years during the Bush administration and a strong supporter of the Patriot Act, was not always so cavalier about civil liberties. While a U.S. senator during the Clinton years, Ashcroft warned about proposed invasions of privacy:


Here is an articulate statement of caution and skepticism. But a Republican administration calls for the same powers, and all these concerns go sailing out the window.

Other conservatives were just as wary of the surveillance powers requested by the Clinton administration, aware that they could easily be abused and employed for partisan or ideological purposes. For instance, "terrorism" could simply be defined as activism on behalf of a cause the current administration in Washington disapproved of. And as far back as the 1970s, the conservative scholar Robert Nisbet was cautioning:


Judge Andrew Napolitano recently asked, "Why should government agents spy on us? They work for us. How about we spy on them? On cops when they arrest and interrogate people or contemplate suspending freedom; on prosecutors when they decide whom to prosecute and what evidence to use; on judges when they rationalize away our guaranteed rights; and on members of Congress whenever they meet with a lobbyist, mark up a piece of legislation, or conspire to assault our liberties or our pocketbooks."

For a patriotic American, there is nothing radical about this attitude at all. This is how the Founding Fathers thought. If our critics want to repudiate the Founding Fathers, let them go ahead and do it. If they won't be honest enough to do so, they should at least refrain from condemning those of us who still believe in the wisdom they left for posterity.

Much more is at stake here than privacy violations or unconstitutional searches, important and dangerous as those are. For example, the president has made clear, in one of his signing statements, that he retains the power to engage in torture regardless of congressional statutes to the contrary. Defense Department memoranda say the same thing.

First of all, legal issues aside, the American people and government should never abide the use of torture by our military or intelligence agencies. A decent society never accepts or justifies torture. It dehumanizes both torturer and victim, yet seldom produces reliable intelligence. Torture by rogue American troops or agents puts all Americans at risk, especially our rank-and-file soldiers stationed in dozens of dangerous places around the globe. It is not difficult to imagine American soldiers or travelers being taken hostage and tortured as some kind of sick retaliation for Abu Ghraib.

Beyond that is the threat posed by unchecked executive power. Executive branch lawyers claim that the president's commander-in-chief powers override federal laws prohibiting torture. But the argument for extraordinary wartime executive powers has been made time and again, always with bad results and the loss of our liberties. War has been used by presidents to excuse the imprisonment of American citizens of Japanese descent, to silence speech, to suspend habeas corpus, and even to control entire private industries. That's why it is precisely during times of relative crisis that we should adhere most closely to the Constitution, not abandon it. The Founders were especially concerned about the consolidation of power during war and national emergencies. War does not justify the suspension of torture laws any more than it justifies the suspension of murder laws, the suspension of due process, or the suspension of the Second Amendment.

The hallowed right of habeas corpus has also been a casualty of the war on terror. The Military Commissions Act of 2006 gives the president the power to detain people indefinitely and to deny the accused any real opportunity to answer the charges against them. It is anti-American at its core. The name of the Act can give the misleading impression that anyone targeted under it can at least bring his case before a military commission. That is not so. If the president wants to punish an accused "enemy combatant," he may bring him before such a commission. But he need not, and if he'd rather that the person remain in prison forever, he is free to adopt that course instead.

This legislation gave legal backing to the practices in which the administration had already been engaged. Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri, a citizen of Qatar, married with five children, was living in America legally in 2001 when he was charged with making false statements in connection with the investigation of 9/11. He was slated to be tried in July 2003. Whatever the merits of the case against him, what happened next is an astonishing departure from American principles and tradition. Before the case could go to trial, the president suddenly declared al-Marri to be an "enemy combatant," whereupon the charges against him were dismissed by the civilian court and he was sent to a military prison, indefinitely.

We need to come to our senses: it cannot be tolerable for the president to have the right to detain people indefinitely, even for life, and not even permit them to review the charges against them. The argument is not that criminals or terrorists should be let loose. Constitutionalists are merely saying that people are at least entitled to confront the charges against them.

The case of Jose Padilla is especially striking. We first heard that Padilla was planning to set off a radiological bomb (a "dirty bomb") in an American city. The government never wound up charging him with that offense, which it had wrung from him by torture. The charges it did finally bring against him were rather more vague and less interesting.

But the federal government did not bring charges against him right away. Instead, Padilla was declared an "enemy combatant," and therefore sent to prison indefinitely without any charges being brought against him. The only reason charges were finally brought against Padilla some three and a half years later is that the administration was afraid that the Supreme Court would rule against its treatment of him. By hearing his case, the administration could head off the Court by declaring that Padilla had received the trial he sought, and that his complaint were therefore moot.

During the three and a half years he was in custody, Padilla was made to endure various forms of torture. Kept in solitary confinement, Padilla was subjected to variations of sleep deprivation. Noxious fumes were introduced to his cell. His cell was made extremely cold for long periods of time. He was drugged, disoriented and threatened with all manner of gruesome fates.

It is time for us to wake up. We have allowed the president to abduct an American citizen on American soil, declare him an "enemy combatant" (a charge the accused has no power to contest, which is rendered by the president in secret and is unreviewable), detain him indefinitely, deny him legal counsel, and subject him to inhumane treatment. How can we not be concerned about such a thing?

Have we been so blinded by propaganda that we have forgotten basic American principles, and legal guarantees that extend back to our British forbears eight centuries ago? This is an outrageous offense against America and her Constitution. Claims that these powers will be exercised only against the bad guys are not worth listening to.

In April 2006, Pultizer Prize-winning Associated Press photographer Bilal Hussein was detained by the American military in Iraq, joining at least 14,000 others around the world who have been similarly detained by the U.S. government. He has not been charged with a crime, and demnands for information from the Associated Press were met with stonewalling. The AP unsuccessfully demanded his release, or at least that formal charges be filed against him.The AP was finally told that their photographer had been involved in the kidnapping of two journalists in Ramadi, but this story didn't hold water: the journalists in question said that Hussein had actually been very helpful to them after their release, when they had no car and no money. That unpersuasive story did nothing to remove the widespread suspicion that the real reason for the AP photographer's detention involved his photographs of the war zone, which were said to have displeased American officials.

What has happened to our country and its image around the world, and why are we allowing it?

In this book I have tried to make as few references to specific legislation as possible, because my preference has been to focus on ideas rather than minutiae, and I have never had much interest in assembling a policy manual. I need to make an exception here, since a piece of legislation I introduced into Congress in late 2007 concisely reflects my views on civil liberties and executive power in light of the war on terror. I am referring to the American Freedom Agenda Act of 2007.
Among other things, the legislation:

• repeals the Military Commissions Act of 2006;

• forbids the use of statements extracted by torture as evidence in any civilian or military tribunal;

• subordinates the executive's surveillance activities to the requirements of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA);

• gives the House odf Representatives and the Senate the legal standing to contest in court any presidential signing statement that indicates the executive's intention to disregard any provisions of a bill; and

• provides that nothing in the Espionage Act of 1917 prevents any journalist from publishing information received from the executive branch or Congress "unless the publication would cause direct, immediate, and irreparable harm to the national security of the United States."

Additionally, the legislation authorizes the president to establish military commissions for the prosecution of war crimes "only in places of active hostilities against the United States where an immediate trial is necessary to preserve fresh evidence or to prevent local anarchy." He is prohibited from "detaining any individual as an unlawful enemy combatant absent proof by substantial evidence that the individual has directly engaged in active hostilities against the United States, provided that no United States citizen shall be detained as an unlawful enemy combatant." Any individual detained as an enemy combatant by the United States "shall be entitled to petition for a writ of habeas corpus under section 2241 of title 28, United States Code."

The Act also says, "No officer or agent of the United States shall kidnap, imprison, or torture any person abroad based solely on the President's belief that the subject of the kidnapping, imprisonment or torture is a criminal or enemy combatant; provided that kidnapping shall be permitted if undertaken with the intent of bringing the kidnapped person for a prosecution or interrogation to gather intelligence before a tribunal that meets international standards of fairness and due process." Knowing violations of this section are to be punished as felonies.

It amazes me that this kind of legislation should even be necessary in America. These are principles that Americans should insist their presidents not only observe, but actually believe in.

Those of us who still mention the Constitution, even now, and our obligation to observe it, are sometimes answered with the curt reply, "We're at war." We are indeed fighting undeclared wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and an open-ended war against terrorism worldwide. But if the president claims extraordinary wartime powers, and we fight undeclared wars with no beginning and no end, when if ever will those extraordinary powers lapse? Since terrorism will never be eliminated completely, should all future presidents be able to act without regard to Congress or the Constitution simply by asserting "We're at war?"

Toward the end of 2007, Senator Jeff Sessions declared, "Some people in this chamber love the Constitution more than they love the safety of this nation. We should all send President Bush a letter thanking him for protecting us." What kind of sheep must politicians take Americans for if they expect us to fall for creepy propaganda like this?

"F.B.I. Data Mining Reached Beyond Initial Targets" by ERIC LICHTBLAU

WASHINGTON, Sept. 8 — The F.B.I. cast a much wider net in its terrorism investigations than it has previously acknowledged by relying on telecommunications companies to analyze phone-call patterns of the associates of Americans who had come under suspicion, according to newly obtained bureau records.

The documents indicate that the Federal Bureau of Investigation used secret demands for records to obtain data not only on individuals it saw as targets but also details on their “community of interest” — the network of people that the target was in contact with.... The community of interest data sought by the F.B.I. is central to a data-mining technique intelligence officials call link analysis....  it is also thought to have helped the National Security Agency identify targets for its domestic eavesdropping program.

Typically, community of interest data might include an analysis of which people the targets called most frequently, how long they generally talked and at what times of day, sudden fluctuations in activity, geographic regions that were called, and other data, law enforcement and industry officials said.

--MORE--"

"Warning!!

Some of you probably already got this.

VERY IMPORTANT - BIG VIRUS COMING !!! PLEASE READ & FORWARD !!!

http://www.snopes.com/computer/virus/postcard.asp

I checked with Norton Anti-Virus, and they are gearing up for this virus! I checked Snopes (URL above:), and it is for real!!

Get this E-mail message sent around to your contacts ASAP.

PLEASE FORWARD THIS WARNING AMONG FRIENDS, FAMILY AND CONTACTS!

You should be alert during the next few days. Do not open any message with an attachment entitled 'POSTCARD FROM HALLMARK,' regardless of who sent it to you.

--MORE--

"Special Reports: A new 9/11 clue

by Jerry Mazza
Online Journal Associate Editor
Aug 27, 2008

Recently, an email drifted in about an article I wrote, What were the Mossad with fraudulent New Zealand Passports doing in Iraq?

The writer said, "I've known about this for some time -- that the Mossad was involved in murdering our troops in a variety of methods to keep them there so we could 'finish' the job by destroying Syria and Iran. For years now I've suspected and now know for sure the Mossad had a lot to do with the 9/11 attack on the WTC. The attached mp3 is a recording of NYPD radio transmissions on 9/11. Listen from the 3-minute mark almost to the end. This was never reported in the media."

The recording is titled, "The WTC-10-5-the-message-about-the-remote-controlled-plane." In the m'lange of scratchy voices bumping each other off and on, around minute three, the words "remote controlled-plane" bump through clearly, are interrupted, and finally assert quite clearly again that "there's a big truck on King Street with the mural of an airplane painted on it diving into New York City and exploding.

--MORE--"

Yeah, they are the "change" party:

"Cindy Sheehan Bugged in Denver

Cindy Sheehan returned to her Denver hotel room today to find the door unlocked and ajar. She walked in to discover a man working on her phone, screw driver in hand.

Sheehan reported, in an email....

--MORE--"

"When government suspends "rights" tyranny inevitably follows

History proves that there is always advance warning when governments enter the final stages of transitioning from freedom to tyranny. The three most obvious warnings are sounded when government begins openly spying on people, publicly punishing opinions and raising up standing armies. The U.S. government and its state, county, municipal and corporate minions have legalized unwarranted surveillance, searches and seizures; those who speak and write in opposition to government policies are subject to punishments ranging from character assassination and harassment to prison sentences and sudden, suspicious deaths and; police at all levels are being militarized in dress, weaponry, demeanor and tactics. What Thomas Jefferson pointed out as historical fact over 200 years ago is supported in contemporary experience as described by Ron Paul. The truth is plain to see: The U.S. government has become obsessed with surveillance and the enforcement of its increasingly unpopular policies with militarized police authority.

The excuse that militarizing police is necessary for making the homeland safe from terrorists is as ancient as tyranny itself. The U.S. government is committed in the direction of tyranny; it cannot and will not turn itself around. To turn an infamous quote from President Bush on its head, "You are either with us [the people] or you are with the terrorists [the U.S. government]."

Thomas Jefferson on surveillance, opinions and standing armies

"There are rights which it is useless to surrender to the government and which governments have yet always been found to invade. These are the rights of thinking and publishing our thoughts by speaking or writing; the right of free commerce; the right of personal freedom. There are instruments for administering the government so peculiarly trustworthy that we should never leave the legislature at liberty to change them. The new Constitution has secured these in the executive and legislative department, but not in the judiciary. It should have established trials by the people themselves, that is to say, by jury. There are instruments so dangerous to the rights of the nation and which place them so totally at the mercy of their governors that those governors, whether legislative or executive, should be restrained from keeping such instruments on foot but in well-defined cases. Such an instrument is a standing army."

--MORE--"

"U.S. Lawmakers Take Aim at Homegrown Terrorist Threat
Many Americans believe that the threat of homegrown terrorism is gravest in Europe, but according to the U.S. government, in the last 18 months more than a half-dozen plots were thwarted right here at home.  Sen. Joe Lieberman says the threat is growing.

"Except that THIS ARTICLE reveals that these home-grown terror arrests are all FBI setups!" -- Mike Rivero of Wake the Flock Up

Many bloggers have pointed out how if the government and industry can't keep our information safe, why do they need all the spying power, but this is baffling:

"Officials said Gonzalez was previously arrested by the Secret Service in 2003 for access device fraud. The Secret Service later discovered that Gonzalez, who was working as a confidential informant for the agency"

As in the bogus terror set-ups -- we ONCE MORE have a GOVERNMENT AGENT or INFORMANT responsible for CRIMINAL CONDUCT!!!!

"11 charged with massive ID theft; 41 million credit card numbers allegedly stolen in global ring; local firms affected" by David Abel and Jenn Abelson, Globe Staff | August 6, 2008

A ring of people spread across the globe hacked into nine major US companies and stole and sold more than 41 million credit and debit card numbers from 2003 to 2008, costing the companies and individuals hundreds of millions of dollars, federal law enforcement officials said yesterday.

"So far as we know, this is the single largest and most complex identity theft case ever charged in this country," US Attorney General Michael Mukasey said at a news conference at the John Joseph Moakley US Courthouse in Boston.

A grand jury indictment released yesterday charged that Albert "Segvec" Gonzalez of Miami, the alleged ringleader, and his 10 conspirators cruised around with a laptop computer and tapped into accessible wireless networks....

Officials said Gonzalez was previously arrested by the Secret Service in 2003 for access device fraud. The Secret Service later discovered that Gonzalez, who was working as a confidential informant for the agency, had become involved in the credit card theft case. He is now in a federal prison in New York awaiting trial on related charges.

--more--"

Can you say martial law police state?

"Bush classifies $200 million cybersecurity program, redacts questions about contractors

08/08/2008
by John Byrne

As Americans focus on the Olympics and the 2008 presidential campaign, the Bush Administration is finalizing plans to establish yet another massive surveillance program -- and has classified almost every single detail.

The Comprehensive National Cyber Security Initiative, established by National Security Presidential Directive 54 and Homeland Security Presidential Directive 23 in January, is intended to improve the government's ability to defend against cybersecurity attacks.

But the Bush Administration has refused to release details on the program's budget, how contracts will be administered, or what contractors might be involved. A whopping $115 million was allocated for the program this year, without any disclosure of progress or accomplishment.

--MORE--"

So don't feel so bad, Americans:

"In a White House meeting Monday, President Bush confronted Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani of Pakistan with intercepted phone calls between Pakistan's powerful ISI intelligence service and the militants."

And yet they can't find bin Laden, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah....

If you like more war propaganda, go HERE

Oh, by the way, it seems that the woman may have been tortured:

In recent weeks, Pakistani newspapers reported that a lawyer, Javed Iqbal Jaffery, had petitioned a Pakistani court for Siddiqui's release and vowed to bring her detention to the UN human rights commissioner.

According to the reports, Jaffrey alleged that Siddiqui was jailed in Kabul after being held in Bagram; a British journalist reached a similar conclusion based on interviews with prisoners released from Bagram.

Please see: Hell-oween: Afghanistan Torture File/The First Abu Ghraib

Hell-oween: Afghanistan Torture File/Bagram