Strict Standards: Only variables should be passed by reference in /home/preswquq/public_html/nbg/fp-includes/core/core.fpdb.class.php on line 302

US TERRORIST ATTACK BEGINS — The USS Donald Cook launches three Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles towards Iraq, March 20, 2003. That day will forever be known as Iraq’s 9/11 where the US launched an unprovoked surprise terrorist attack against the sovereign state of Iraq and the innocent people of Iraq. On that day the US did not attack the Iraqi military it cowardly attacked and murdered Iraqi civilians while they slept

The CIA is the covert action arm of the President’s foreign policy advisers. In that capacity it overthrows or supports foreign governments while reporting “intelligence” justifying those activities. It shapes its intelligence, even in such critical areas as foreign countries’ nuclear weapons capability, to support presidential policy. Disinformation is a large part of its covert action responsibility, and the American people are the primary target of its lies.

The CIA is a rogue organization, out of control. The CIA’s main mission and purpose is to implement the policies of the President of the United States. The CIA carries out unofficial U.S. government policy. That the CIA is a terrorist organization implies that the United States is a terrorist state. Considering the millions of deaths that the U.S. has caused and the enormous suffering that its international policies produce, its hypocrisy in condemning other countries as “terrorist states” would be ludicrous if it were not so tragic.

The CIA has been a terrorist organization from its beginnings, when it included a large number of former Nazis — former members of the Gestapo and the Nazi military intelligence (such as Reinhard Gehlen). Unlike smaller terrorist organizations such as ETA the CIA does not normally engage in terrorism by sending its own employees to plant bombs, etc. Rather, it tends to act through intermediaries and recruited foreign nationals including mercenaries, agents and operatives. The CIA sometimes makes use of U.S. military personnel - used widely in the Vietnam war and extensively in the US Wars of Terror.

Evidence that the CIA is a terrorist organization is clear from its record of terrorist activities (deceptively called “counterinsurgency” or “low intensity conflict”). Here are just a few easily verified examples:

* During the Vietnam war the CIA conducted Operation Phoenix, an assassination program. The goal was not only to eliminate those Vietnamese who might oppose the U.S. (which in practice meant most of the population of Vietnam) but also to terrorize the entire population of South Vietnam and to suppress opposition to the occupying U.S. forces. Over 20,000 Vietnamese were murdered, often at random.
* The CIA also recruited a mercenary army in Vietnam (financed by profits from the CIA’s heroin smuggling), particularly from among the Hmong villagers, which was used to terrorize the civilian population and to prevent them from assisting the Viet Cong.
* The CIA organized and financed (with the profits from its cocaine smuggling) the activities of the Contras in Nicaragua, who murdered tens of thousands of civilians, and tried to disrupt the economy, in an attempt to destabilize the legitimate Sandinista government. (For this the U.S. was condemned in the World Court for engaging in international terrorism, and it rejected a U.N. security council resolution calling upon it to observe international law.)
* The CIA planned and organized the military coup d’etat in 1973 in Chile which overthrew the legitimately elected government of Salvador Allende (because he would not implement economic policies designed in Washington to favor American corporations doing business in Chile) and brought to power the regime of General Augusto Pinochet; this regime abducted, tortured and killed thousands of Chilean citizens in an attempt to suppress opposition.
* The CIA organized and supported the Turkish government’s persecution of its Kurdish minority during the 1990s, resulting in tens of thousands of deaths and millions of refuges; the aim being the suppression of Kurdish culture and the elimination of Kurdish demands for a separate state.
* The September 11th attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon are widely regarded as terrorist acts. There is evidence of CIA involvement.

The concept of “terrorism” is not clear and there is no generally agreed upon definition of the term. It is, however, a tactic, a means to a particular end. A tactic can always be used, and is always a possible course of action for some group or other. Once this is understood it is clear that it is ridiculous to declare a “War on Terrorism” — one cannot defeat a tactic. To declare a war on terrorism is to declare perpetual war (which, in fact, is the intention). When the US declared al-Qaeda a terrorist group they declared themselves to be terrorists. Al-Qaeda is a cover for CIA terrorist activities and attacks against both foreign and domestic civilian populations. 9/11 has already been declared the work of Al-Qaeda. If the accused is widely accepted as being the group that planned for and carried out the attacks of 9/11 then it is equally accepted that the US government attacked its own people on 9/11. There is clear and concrete evidence that the US government ordered the CIA to plan for a terrorist attack against the US and its people. It was already decided on that the US would blame a newly formed CIA terrorist cell named al-Qaeda for the attacks and use this clear act of treason as an excuse to attack any state they fraudulently declared as supporters of their home grown terrorist cell al-Qaeda. al-Qaeda naming is the US tool for initiating any new or forthcoming policies of the US president. al-Qaeda is a phantom terrorist group. The CIA is given $billions to commit terrorist attacks against any nation, including the US. al-Qaeda threats are the US president’s threats. al-Qaeda terrorist attacks are the US president’s attacks.

In September 2001 President George W. Bush declared a “War on Terrorism” and vowed to destroy all terrorist organizations “with a global reach”. For the good of both America and the rest of the world the US should start with the largest international terrorist organization of them all — their own CIA. To end the US wars of aggressions, every nation on Earth has to only target the CIA. First ban entry of any “suspected” CIA agent from entering ones country, as their mission is always the same - terrorism, namely to recruit and train the people of the country they enter to commit terrorist acts against the US targeted country. The CIA is not and never was a peace keeping organization. Their mandate is to infiltrate and destroy from within the country they illegally enter. They are murders, assassins, saboteurs, kidnappers, thieves and spies. They carry out the illegal orders of the United States president.

Extraordinary Rendition, Torture and Disappearances in the “War on Terror”

Human rights groups and several public inquiries in Europe have found the U.S. government, with the complicity of numerous governments worldwide, to be engaged in the illegal practice of extraordinary rendition, secret detention, and torture.

The U.S. government-sponsored program of renditions is an unlawful practice in which numerous persons have been illegally detained and secretly flown to third countries, where they have suffered additional human rights abuses including torture and enforced disappearance. No one knows the exact number of persons affected, due to the secrecy under which the operations are carried out.

The existence and locations of the facilities — referred to as “black sites” in classified White House, CIA, Justice Department and congressional documents — are known to only a handful of officials in the United States and, usually, only to the president and a few top intelligence officers in each host country.

“Ninety-five percent of the work of intelligence agencies around the world is disinformation and deception,” Andreas von Bulow, former parliamentary official responsible for the budget for Germany’s intelligence agencies, told American Free Press in December 2001.

“If what I say is right, the whole US government should end up behind bars” and “They have hidden behind a veil of secrecy and destroyed the evidence - that they invented the story of 19 Muslims working within Osama bin Laden’s al-Qa’eda - in order to hide the truth of their own covert operation”

Like Nazi Germany of 1933, American news stands today carry a mainstream news dedicated to pushing the government’s version of the truth for 9/11 while viciously smearing independent researchers as extremists who peddle fantasies and make poisonous claims.

The inactions of US government on 9/11, the investigation that never followed, the USA PATRIOT Act, and the propaganda being disseminated by the mainstream news, are strikingly similar to actions attributed to the Nazi ministers Joseph Goebbels and Hermann Gvring.


What can civilians of any nation do to defend themselves from armed attacks and acts of aggression? Even though the US and Israel may have the most technologically advanced military weaponry on Earth their technology is their weakness. A bomber or fighter jet can be grounded or forced to crash. Civilians being attacked can stop a tank, Humvee or attack vehicle in its tracks and force the soldiers to dismount and leave the protection of their armored vehicles. The modern military machines rely heavily on sensors to both defend themselves and attack innocent people. There are no longer any openings in tanks that would make the tank crewman venerable to attacks. There are sensors and video feeds that keep track and track targets. So to stop them in their tracks all an individual would have to do is blind those sensors. Bank robbers today usually blind the video cameras in a bank when they attempt to rob it. They spray the camera lens with paint or cover it. The same application can be applied to any moving combat vehicle. Paint balls or paint bombs that target the sensors and video will force the tank to stop and the tank will no longer be able to select any new target. Painting or oil spraying the sensors and videos renders a $million tank useless. The same applies for aircraft. Anti aircraft shells with paint or oil canisters can really mess up a canopy of a $billion aircraft. There is no way any pilot can clean the canopy after its just flown through paint or oil bursts. The pilot will be forced to eject.

So to defend yourself, start stocking up on oil based paints. Your life may depend on it. Your freedom will depend on it. Oil based is better as it can also start a fire in the engines or jets of any military aircraft or transport vehicle. Your government is taking away you weapons that you will need to defend yourself. You can still defend yourself using every day household items like kitchen knives, glass, baseball bats, barbecue propane tanks, gas cans, liquor, aerosol air fresheners and paint.

“I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank. ” - Barack Obama Campaign Promise - October 27, 2007

US Air Force Predator Drone. Fitting name as the US is no longer a peacekeeping nation. The US is now a predator - One that victimizes, plunders, or destroys, especially for one’s own gain

There is absolutely no need, cause or justification for anyone to start a war. We are after all civilized human beings. Any international incident can be resolved peacefully. Those who start wars are nothing more than criminals with a criminal intent to cause the death of another human being. The most effective course of action to end any war is to go after the person or persons who gave the order to attack another country. One person does not have the authority to launch a war against another especially in a democratic society. If a leader of one country decides to go to war with another country that leader is committing crimes that include crimes against peace, crimes against humanity and war crimes.

In the game of chess the objective is to remove your opponent’s king in as few moves as possible. The object of the game is to checkmate your opponent’s king, whereby the king is under immediate attack (in “check”) and there is no way to remove it from attack on the next move. The game is over as soon as you capture your opponent’s king and your opponent surrenders to you. Wars of aggression can be ended quickly simply by applying the game of chess to your self-defense strategy. Defend your people by taking the course of action that will quickly capture and remove your opponent’s leadership.

International law and domestic law allow lethal force to be used in self-defense against armed attacks.

Whether it’s George W Bush or Barack Hussein Obama engaged in an unprovoked attacks against Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan or the United States own terrorist cell, the CIA, kidnapping foreign citizens from around the World, it’s legal to use lethal force in response to those kinds of attacks. There’s no special protection given to heads of state that protects them from the otherwise lawful use of lethal force in self-defense. Nuremberg established that heads of state have no immunity from responsibility for aggressive war. There’s no logical legal principle that says it’s better to spare George W Bush or Barack Hussein Obama’s life, when they are the head war criminals who started the war and continue to wage wars of aggressions against sovereign foreign states and kill and continue to kill tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of innocent people.

Laws of armed conflict

Any uniformed member of the Military is a lawful target under the laws of armed conflict. If he is the head policy maker (commander-in-chief, prime minister, president, emperor, chancellor, king or queen) in deciding to launch an aggressive war, then he’s committing an international crime; denying him any right to the kind of protection we give hospital workers or Red Cross workers or the like. If we want to deter aggression, we have to extract a cost from those who are making the decisions. A warmongering leader is not willing to put his own safety at risk, and so it’s very important that we make it clear that we have the legal right to go after even heads of state engaged in massive international aggression. George W Bush needlessly and recklessly sacrificed over 4000 of his country’s young men and women in his war against Iraq. He and Obama are certainly willing to give up thousands more in their wars of terrorism and aggression against Iraq and Afghanistan and threats and acts of aggression against Iran, Pakistan and Yemen. George W Bush was not willing to put his own safety at risk, and so it’s very important that we make it clear that the US people and the international community have the legal right to go after even heads of state engaged in massive international aggression.

Former Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta gave testimony that vice-president Dick Cheney intended to keep NORAD fighter jets from responding to the 9/11 attacks – evidence that Cheney is guilty of treason ~ “During the time that the airplane was coming into the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President…the plane is 50 miles out…the plane is 30 miles out….and when it got down to the plane is 10 miles out, the young man also said to the vice president “do the orders still stand?” And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said “Of course the orders still stand, have you heard anything to the contrary!?

The Nuremberg Trial established “Legal Self-Defense” against wars of aggression, kidnappings, torture and any and all acts of aggression by any state against another state.

The only logical and legal course of action to defend ones country and countrymen from an unlawful military attack from another country is to hold the person or persons who gave the order to attack, accountable for their criminal acts. Instead of retaliating against the people of the country whose leader ordered the attack on your country and countrymen one should only attack those leaders who gave the order. No one else should suffer or pay for the crimes of the war leaders. Only the leaders who order their country to attack and murder the people of another country should suffer and pay with their lives. The Nuremberg Trial established “Legal Self-Defense” against wars of aggression, kidnappings, torture and acts of aggression against another state. The honorable and patriotic course of action to end illegal wars is to target those criminal leaders. Every country and their people has the right to self-defense and their legal rights include only attacks against the criminal leadership, not against innocent civilians. As soon as the leader or leaders who gave the order to attack and kill your people are eliminated then the war will end. If someone takes over command of the military forces after the war leaders are eliminated and they too order more attacks against you and your country and your people, then they too are legal and legitimate targets. Infiltrating the enemy’s country and attacking only the leadership will end the war quickly and deter future leaders from ordering their people to attack and kill another.

Had the Allied nations succeeded in killing Adolf Hitler at the beginning of WWII the War would have ended a lot sooner and millions of lives would have been spared. A war that needlessly killed 23,100,000 Soviets, 449,800 English, 418,500 US, 5,600,000 Polish, 2,700,000 Japanese, 7,233,000 Germans, 567,600 French, 20,000,000 Chinese, 45,300 Canadians for an estimated death toll of roughly 72 million. If a team of snipers had been sent into Germany with the sole mission of killing Adolf Hilter six million European Jews would have been saved from the Holocaust. Snipers are the biggest psychological deterrent on the battlefield. The mere rumor they’re on the battlefield can send shivers through the enemy ranks. Imagine what a team of snipers inserted behind enemy lines could do to the aggressor’s chain of command. It does not matter how powerful a country might be. It would not matter if the aggressor had the most technologically advanced fighter jets, bombers, tank, or warships, once a sniper is able to infiltrate the aggressor’s country there is nowhere to hide. A good sniper could gain entry as a diplomat, tourist or business person. A good sniper would not need to smuggle in his or her weapon as he or she would have been trained to use the weapon of choice of the aggressive nation and acquire their weapon from the aggressive nation’s own police and military or even from citizens with hunting rifles. It took 3 weeks for the US law enforcement agencies to find and capture the Beltway sniper in October 2002 in Washington, D.C. How long would it take to find a team of highly trained and motivated snipers? That is if you even knew they were already in country.

The Nuremberg trials sets legal precedents in order to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war.

Sixty-two years ago, four judges met to deliberate the fate of the first men ever tried for war crimes in an international court of law.

After Nazi Germany was defeated in 1945, the major victorious allies (the United States, the Soviet Union, Great Britain and France) convened a trial of 21 of the most prominent Nazi government, military and media figures in the Palace of Justice at Nuremberg, the spiritual home of Nazism.

Another German, Martin Bormann, was tried in absentia.

The Allies drew up a charter establishing an International Military Tribunal (IMT) as the legal basis for prosecution of these men for three distinct categories of crimes: crimes against peace, war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The defendants were also charged with “participating in the formulation or execution of a common plan or conspiracy” to commit these crimes.

The bench was made up of one judge from each of the four allied countries. The trial began on 20 November 1945. Nine months later, on 31 August 1946 the trial closed as the defendants made their final statements.

The judges announced their verdicts on 1 October. They found nineteen of the defendants guilty of one, some, or all of these crimes. Twelve, including Martin Bormann, were sentenced to death. One, Herman Goering, Germany’s number two Nazi, committed suicide before his scheduled execution.

Three were acquitted and seven received prison sentences. Ten were hung.

The 1946 trial was the first of a series of thirteen Nuremberg trials which continued until April 1949.

While the Nuremberg trials are, these days, seldom invoked or discussed, they were and still are, in the words of Tribunal President Sir Geoffrey Lawrence, “unique in the history of the jurisprudence of the world”. Among the most groundbreaking aspects was the drive to formally criminalise the three categories of crimes, and to establish responsibility by individuals for these crimes. This was simply unprecedented.

The effort to try the Germans in an international forum was directed in large part by the United States. The chief U.S. prosecutor, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson, opened the prosecution.

Today, when the Nuremberg trials are remembered, they are remembered primarily for the prosecution and punishment of individuals for genocide. Equally important at the time though, especially in the first trial, was the focus on aggressive war.

Thus, the first sentence of Justice Jackson’s opening statement: “The privilege of opening the first trial in history for crimes against the peace of the world imposes a grave responsibility.”

Crimes against peace and the responsibility for them were defined in Article 6, the heart of the Charter of the IMT: “The tribunal…shall have the power to try and punish persons who…whether as individuals or as members of organisations, committed any of the following crimes…for which there shall be individual responsibility: (a) Crimes Against Peace, namely, planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances…”

The desire was not only to punish individuals for crimes but to set an international moral and legal precedent for the future. Indeed, before the end of 1946, the United Nations General Assembly unanimously adopted Resolution 95 (1), affirming “the principles of International Law recognised by the Charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal and the judgment of the Tribunal.”

Founded in the aftermath of World War II, the United Nations invoked in the first sentence of the preamble, the single most fundamental goal: “…to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind…”

To this end the United Nations Charter explicitly forbids armed aggression and violations of the sovereignty of any state by any other state, except in immediate self defense (Article 2, Sec. 4 and Articles 39 and 51).

Invoking the precedent set by the United States and the Allies at Nuremberg, there can be no doubt that the U.S. led invasion of Iraq in 2003 was a war of aggression. There was no imminent threat to American security nor to the security of the world. The invasion violated the U.N. Charter as well as U.N. Security Council Resolution #1441.

As a war of aggression, the invasion falls into the Nuremberg category of Crimes Against Peace. As such, there is individual responsibility for this crime.

Thus, if Americans chose to be bound by the precedent which they helped set and for which they punished leaders of World War II Germany, they would arrest and prosecute those individuals responsible for the invasion of Iraq: George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice and their enablers in government and in the media.

Those who justify the invasion of Iraq, invoking the U.S. self-declared mission to rid the world of evil, would do well to remember the words of Justice Jackson: “Our position is that whatever grievances a nation may have, however objectionable it finds the status quo, aggressive warfare is an illegal means for settling these grievances or for altering these conditions.

And, for those who have difficulty visualising American leaders as defendants in a criminal trial, Justice Jackson’s words again: “(T)he ultimate step in avoiding periodic wars, which are inevitable in a system of international lawlessness, is to make statesmen responsible to law. And let me make clear that while this law is first applied against German aggressors, the law includes, and if it is to serve a useful purpose it must condemn, aggression by any other nations, including those which sit here now in judgement. We are able to do away with domestic tyranny and violence and aggression by those in power against the rights of their own people only when we make all men answerable to the law. This trial represents mankind’s desperate effort to apply the discipline of the law to statesmen who have used their powers of state to attack the foundations of the world’s peace and to commit aggression against the rights of their neighbours.”

The Bush and Blair administrations commenced a war against Iraq and its people in defiance of the United Nations Security Council. The Iraq war is unlawful because it was waged in contravention of international law. The relevant articles that prohibit one nation or alliance of nations waging war against any other nation or nations are embodied in Chapter VII of the 1945 United Nations Charter under the caption “Action with Respect to Threats to the Peace, Breaches of the Peace, and Acts of Aggression”. No member or members of the United Nations are entitled to wage a war against any nation in defiance of the UN Security Council. It is also clear that a “war of choice” is not permitted. A “war of necessity” in self defense if attacked by another country is permitted under Article 51 – this too is a temporary measure till the Security Council takes steps necessary to maintain international peace and security. Article 51 does not legitimize a pre-emptive war against any nation on the pretext that there is an imminent threat of attack by the said nation.

Aggressors do not have the legal right or authority to declare self-defense. The people of Afghanistan and Iraq were attacked by the US. The people of Afghanistan and Iraq are victims of the US wars of aggression. The civilian population have been and are still being attacked by the US military - clearly defined as war crimes according to International and US laws. The Taliban are not terrorists. They were the legal governing political party of Afghanistan before the unlawful war of aggression by the US and NATO forces. The Taliban are doing what every patriotic citizen would do to defend their country and countrymen when attacked by a foreign state - they are resisting. The Taliban are Afghan civilians who have been forced to take up arms against the invaders in order to defend their country and fellow countrymen from the brutal and unlawful occupation. The Taliban did not attack the US on September 11, 2001. The US named hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the United Arab Emirate. bin Laden was not a Taliban or Afghan citizen, he was a rich Saudi Arabian who worked for the US (recruited, trained and lead the US financed mujahideen insurgency that fought against the Soviet and Afghan government troops during the Soviet war in Afghanistan). The majority of hijackers and the alleged master mind are not citizens of Afghanistan or Iraq, they are Saudi. The US could have claimed legal self-defense if they had attacked and now occupy Saudi Arabia because according to the evidence presented by the US FBI Saudi Arabia was the country that attacked the US on September 11, 2001.

Abraham Lincoln - “America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.”

Bill of Rights Amendment XIV
Section 1. … “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

When the World Trade Towers collapsed, most Americans simply refused to believe suggestions that the attacks had been staged by parties working for the US Government itself. Americans were afraid to, even as news reports surfaced proving that the US Government had announced plans for the invasion of Afghanistan early in the year, plans into which the attacks on the World Trade Towers which angered the American people into support of the already-planned war fit entirely too conveniently.

But so trapped are Americans by their belief in their own bravery that they will themselves to be blind to the evidence before their eyes, so that they can nod in agreement with the government while still imagining themselves to have courage, even as they avoid the one situation which most requires real courage; to stand up to the government’s lies and deceptions.

Immediately after the September 11, 2001 attacks the US Government requested temporary extraordinary powers, powers specifically banned under Constitutional law, but powers the government is claiming they need to have to deal with the “terrorists”.

The response of the United States Government to a frightened and enraged U.S. citizenry over the September 11 attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center has been eerily reminiscent of Hitler’s strategy following the burning of the Reichstag. As well, the rapidity and recklessness with which the Bush administration and the U.S. Congress have abrogated the Bill of Rights places the U.S. Government squarely in the same camp with the “enemies of freedom” they purport to oppose.

The Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001

The U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Committee steam rolled through the US Congress a bill which would dramatically increase the power of U.S. law enforcement agencies. Attorney General John Ashcroft insisted that the FBI needed additional surveillance and enforcement powers immediately and the Department of Justice demanded the bill be enacted by September 28. The House Judiciary committee was scheduled to vote on the Bush administration’s bill on the morning of September 25; however, in response to an outcry the vote was rescheduled to take place only two days after the catastrophic attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The Senate voted for anti-terrorist legislation which increased Internet surveillance after senators were given just 30 minutes to read the measure.

The Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001 eliminated the legal requirement for government agents to obtain permission from a judge before being allowed to search homes and download computer files. Under the law, the information gathered could be used in court, a legal change which presently violates constitutional protections against search and seizure. The bill would also eliminate the requirement for a judge to sign a warrant in order for government agents to obtain billing records from hotels, phone companies, and other businesses, replacing judicial review with an administrative subpoena. Essentially, agencies would be able to sign their own search warrants and conduct searches in routine secrecy, without having to notify the subject of the search.

Additionally, this law gives broad surveillance powers to the federal government, and authorizes the issuance of wiretaps by a secret seven-judge court in Washington, D.C. The DOJ bill imposes a host of Wiretap Act expansions which are not limited to terrorism investigations, and which vastly increase the power of the federal government to conduct surveillance of the reading habits and correspondence of the American people. The DOJ bill expanded the power of the police to record the phone numbers of incoming and outgoing phone calls on a phone line to include surveillance of Internet surfing and e-mail.

Coverage on Monday, September 24, of the Anti-Terrorism Act was limited to Attorney General John Ashcroft’s testimony urging hasty passage of the sweeping new police powers sought by the Bush administration. Although Ashcroft’s testimony was open to television cameras, the committee’s Republican staff ordered camera crews to leave when civil liberties and free-speech advocates were called to testify. This happened in violation of House rules which state, “Whenever a hearing or meeting conducted by a committee or subcommittee is open to the public, those proceedings shall be open to coverage by audio and visual means.”

“The Patriot Act: The Most Abominable, Unconstitutional, Hateful Law from the Point of Freedom since the Alien & Sedtion Act of 1798!” - unconstitutionality of the act is that it violated the Tenth Amendment: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

The Office of Homeland Security

On the evening of September 20, 2001 President Bush allied himself with the worst enemies of freedom. He made a seemingly innocuous — even a comforting-sounding — announcement. He said he had created the cabinet-level Office of Homeland Security, with Pennsylvania governor Tom Ridge as its head.

Most people were utterly unaware of the significance of Bush’s new bureaucracy. But for anyone watching the advance of police-state policies in America, absolutely nothing could have been more ominous. The Homeland Defense Agency is not a new idea. Conceived by a bi-partisan commission headed by former senators Gary Hart and Warren Rudman, this Clinton-era conception, ‘The Phase III Report Of The U.S. Commission On National Security/21st Century,’ is nothing less than the framework for a permanent military-bureaucratic American police state.

The new Homeland Defense Agency is the lynchpin of a plan that extensively reorganizes both the executive and legislative functions of the U.S. government. Among other things, the plan makes the National Guard a national police force. It extensively federalizes both the study and the work of science, mathematics, and engineering. It creates numerous new sub-bureaucracies. The Homeland Security agency itself is to ‘be built upon the Federal “Emergency Management Agency, with the three organizations currently on the front line of border security - the Coast Guard, the Customs Service, and the Border Patrol - transferred to it.’ The plan calls for the new agency to oversee activities of the Department of Defense, as well as to assume a variety of duties now held by agencies from the Department of Commerce to the FBI.”

Bush: “If I take away our freedom then they can’t hate us for it”

The US people has yet to realize that their own government is intentionally destroying their own country. bin Laden didn`t take away your freedom the Bush administration did. bin Laden didn’t attack the US on September 11, 2001 the Bush administration did. bin Laden isn`t kidnapping, torturing and detaining without charge thousands of foreigners and US citizens, the Bush administration did and Obama has ordered these illegal actions to continue. bin Laden and phantom terrorists aren`t bankruptcy the US, the Bush administration did and Obama is putting the nail in the coffin.

The US government hates your freedoms - your freedom of religion, your freedom of speech, your freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with their illegal policies and agendas.

The events of September 11, 2001 should have strengthened the resolve of the US government to work harder to safeguard the rights and freedoms of the US people. After all it is the stated policy of the US government to “not negotiate with terrorists”. After all George W Bush accused bin Laden and terrorists of trying to take away your freedom. Bush stated “On September the 11th, enemies of freedom committed an act of war against our country. … They hate our freedoms — our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other.”

bin Laden didn’t draw up the Patriot Act - the US government did.

Just six weeks after the September 11 attacks, a panicked Congress passed the “USA PATRIOT Act,” an overnight revision of the nation’s surveillance laws that vastly expanded the government’s authority to spy on its own citizens and reduced checks and balances on those powers, such as judicial oversight. The government never demonstrated that restraints on surveillance had contributed to the attack, and indeed much of the new legislation had nothing to do with fighting terrorism. Rather, the bill represented a successful use of the terrorist attacks by the FBI to roll back unwanted checks on its power. . . . Under these changes and other authorities asserted by the Bush Administration, U.S. intelligence agents could conduct a secret search of an American citizen’s home, use evidence found there to declare him an “enemy combatant,” and imprison him without trial. The courts would have no chance to review these decisions — indeed, they might never even find out about them.” ~ Jay Stanley and Barry Steinhardt,

USA PATRIOT ACT of 2001 - aka “Public Law No: 107-56,” aka “Ashcroft’s police-state bill,” illegally passed into law on 26 October 2001.

* Section 106 - Unlawful PRESIDENTIAL AUTHORITY (seizure of assets without due process)




















The Patriot Act took away the rights and freedom of the US people. It infringed and denies the people of the United States of American their inalienable rights and freedom. See for yourself. The Bill of Rights has been attacked by the both the Bush and Obama government. The Patriot Act clearly violates the US supreme law, the US Constitution. The Patriot Act clearly is in violation of the First Amendment, Fourth Amendment, Fifth Amendment, Sixth Amendment, Seventh Amendment, Eighth Amendment, Ninth Amendment and Tenth Amendment. The Bush Administration’s Patriot Act is clearly in violation of US Law. It is an attack on the rights and freedoms of the US people.

The Bill of Rights

The Preamble to the Bill of Rights:

Congress of the United States begun and held at the City of New-York, on Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.

THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.

RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all, or any of which Articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution; viz.

ARTICLES in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution.


* First Amendment – Establishment Clause, Free Exercise Clause; freedom of speech, of the press, and of assembly; right to petition

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

* Second Amendment – Right to keep and bear arms.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

* Third Amendment – Protection from quartering of troops.

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

* Fourth Amendment – Protection from unreasonable search and seizure.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

* Fifth Amendment – due process, double jeopardy, self-incrimination, eminent domain.

No person shall be held to answer for any capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

* Sixth Amendment – Trial by jury and rights of the accused; Confrontation Clause, speedy trial, public trial, right to counsel

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.

* Seventh Amendment – Civil trial by jury.

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

* Eighth AmendmentProhibition of excessive bail and cruel and unusual punishment.

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

* Ninth Amendment – Protection of rights not specifically enumerated in the Bill of Rights.

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

* Tenth Amendment – Powers of states and people.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

The USA Patriot Act is forbidden by The United States Constitution - a Bill of attainder

A bill of attainder (also known as an act or writ of attainder) is an act of the legislature declaring a person or group of persons guilty of some crime and punishing them without benefit of a trial. The United States Constitution forbids both the federal and state governments to enact bills of attainder, in Article 1, Sections 9 and 10, respectively. It was considered an excess or abuse of the British monarchy and Parliament. No bills of attainder have been passed since 1798, that is until 2001. The Bush administration illegally passed a bill of attainder when they drew up and made law the USA Patriot Act. The Patriot Act is the US government usurping the law by declaring unjustly and unlawfully a person or group of persons guilty of some crime and punishing them without benefit of a trial. The Bush administration violated US law when he and his government imposed the designation of “enemy combatant,” on all who opposed the Bush administration’s policies and agendas, not only in Iraq or Afghanistan but within the United States itself. The designation of “enemy combatant” and the new Obama designation of “unlawful combatant” falsely and unlawfully allowed the United States government to hold suspected terrorists at length without criminal charges. The “enemy combatant” or “unlawful combatant” designations are both bill of attainders that illegally declares a person or group of persons guilty of some crime and punishing them without benefit of a trial - The United States Constitution forbids both the federal and state governments from enacting such illegal bills of attainder.

The provision in the United States Constitution forbiding both the federal and state governments from enacting bills of attainder reflects the importance that the framers attached to this issue, since the unamended constitution imposes very few restrictions on state governments’ power.

Within the U.S. Constitution, the clauses forbidding attainder laws serve two purposes. First, they reinforced the separation of powers, by forbidding the legislature to perform judicial functions—since the outcome of any such acts of legislature would of necessity take the form of a bill of attainder. Second, they embody the concept of due process, which was later reinforced by the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. The text of the Constitution, Article I, Section 9; Clause 3 is “No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed”. The constitution of every State also expressly forbids bills of attainder. For example, Wisconsin’s constitution Article I, Section 12 reads:

No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, nor any law impairing the obligation of contracts, shall ever be passed, and no conviction shall work corruption of blood or forfeiture of estate.

Contrast this with the subtly more modern variation of the Texas version: Article 1 (Titled Bill of Rights) Section 16, entitled Bills of Attainder; Ex Post Facto or Retroactive Laws: Impairing Obligation of Contracts: “No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, retroactive law, or any law impairing the obligation of contracts, shall be made”.

The precedent that best reflects most of the original intention of the mandates is from Cummings v. Missouri. It states

A bill of attainder, is a legislative act which inflicts punishment without judicial trial and includes any legislative act which takes away the life, liberty or property of a particular named or easily ascertainable person or group of persons because the legislature thinks them guilty of conduct which deserves punishment.

The stated purpose of the USA Patriot Act is to “deter and punish American terrorists in the United States and around the world, to enhance law enforcement investigatory tools, and for other purposes.” One criticism of the Act is that “other purposes” often includes the detection and prosecution of non-terrorist alleged future crimes.

Peace on Earth

Heaven on Earth, we need it now
I’m sick of all of this hanging around
Sick of sorrow, sick of the pain
I’m sick of hearing again and again
That there’s gonna be peace on Earth

Where I grew up there weren’t many trees
Where there was we’d tear them down
And use them on our enemies
They say that what you mock
Will surely overtake you
And you become a monster
So the monster will not break you

And it’s already gone too far
Who said that if you go in hard
You won’t get hurt?

Jesus can you take the time
To throw a drowning man a line
Peace on Earth
Tell the ones who hear no sound
Whose sons are living in the ground
Peace on Earth
No whos or whys
No one cries like a mother cries
For peace on Earth
She never got to say goodbye
To see the color in his eyes
Now he’s in the dirt
Peace on Earth

They’re reading names out over the radio
All the folks the rest of us won’t get to know
Sean and Julia, Gareth and Ann and Breda
Their lives are bigger than any big idea

Jesus can you take the time
To throw a drowning man a line
Peace on Earth
To tell the ones who hear no sound
Whose sons are living in the ground
Peace on Earth
Jesus sing a song you wrote
The words are sticking in my throat
Peace on Earth
Hear it every Christmas time
But hope and history won’t rhyme
So what’s it worth
This peace on Earth

Peace on Earth
Peace on Earth
Peace on Earth

“Peace On Earth” is property of U2 and it’s producers and/or promoters and is used here pursuant to the fair use provision of the DMCA as outlined in title 17, section 107 of the United States Code

Earth Song

Earth Song by Michael Jackson - Jackson had expressed great interest in humanitarianism, equality and world peace. Songs such as “Earth Song”, “Can You Feel It”, “We Are the World” and “Man in the Mirror” convey this. The original Heal the World Foundation was a charitable organization founded by entertainer Michael Jackson in 1992. The foundation’s creation was inspired by his charitable single of the same name. Through his foundation, Jackson airlifted 46 tons of supplies to Sarajevo, instituted drug and alcohol abuse education and donated millions of dollars to less fortunate children.

Vast swaths of agricultural lands are disappearing at an unprecedented rate. Lands needed to grow the food to feed the World population are being sold to developers to build over priced commercial and residential complexes. Trees come down and land is stripped clean of its food bearing topsoil to make way for new massive factories and a maze of new homes.

In case you haven’t noticed new homes are being built, void of any land. No yard for your children to play in and be healthy. No yard to go out to and utilize the healing power of the sun. The sun provides the basis for all life on earth. The sun is the source of energy for all plants, and indirectly, for all animals. If the sun causes cancer, man wouldn’t be here today. Contrary to popular belief, sunbathing actually helps heal cancer of the skin while sunblock (which contains harmful chemicals and toxins) increases cancer risk . Can sunlight help prevent cancers and other diseases such as type 1 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and certain autoimmune and chronic diseases? The answer is yes. “In recent years we’ve all been trained to fear the sun, due to the threat of skin cancer. Nothing could be further from the truth. Now there is a growing belief that exposure to the sun may not actually cause skin cancer. It is the chemicals that we put on our skin that is actually causing skin cancer. Chemicals that are in the sunblocks, colognes, perfumes, moisturisers and soaps. As a study published in the prestigious Cancer journal indicates, exposure to sun actually decreases cancer rates” The light and heat from the sun are indispensable to all nature. Humanity is also part of nature and needs sunlight for health and well being, for vitality and happiness. Sunlight was used for centuries to prevent and cure diseases. Sunlight can heal us and help us in the future. Sunlight helps the body heal wounds and injuries and overcome virtually any illness. Dr. Carl Hoffminster wrote that soldiers in World War II healed and survived much better when their open wounds and broken bones were exposed to sunlight.

Today the new homes of these massive new sub-divisions are forcing people to stay inside where they become ill, both physically and mentally, and die sooner. All because they live in homes void of any land. A society of people which lives most of their lives indoors lack the necessary sunlight exposure that helps the body heal wounds and injuries and overcome virtually any illness. A yard is also necessary for nourishing your body as it can also be used to grow your own fruit and vegetables.

While the developed and developing world engage in a pissing match on who should take the lead on addressing climate change…people (mostly the poor) die, get flooded out of their homes, while battling food shortages and disease. Meanwhile the human population continues to explode. The world needs to invest $83 billion a year in agriculture in developing countries to feed 9.1 billion people in 2050, the United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization projected. Nothing could be further from the truth. Money isn’t the answer. The World only needs to stop raping the land by stop using the land for new development. Instead of developing farm land, that is needed for growing food, we need to rethink how we build. We need to start renovating instead of building new homes and factories. We need to expand upwards and not outwards. We need to make better use of the land in the cities and towns. We need to start building hi rise factories instead of single story factories that take up acres of farm land. We need to build housing complexes with a center green common area where the occupants of those complexes can go outside and take advantage of the healing Sun. If we don’t start now, today, we will surely die of hunger, of disease and from wars that are fought to seize control of the last remaining land, food and water. It starts by stopping the 1% of the World population (the rich) who are stealing 99.9% of the Earth’s bounty and hoarding it.

One day we must come to see that peace is not merely a distant goal we seek, but that it is a means by which we arrive at that goal. We must pursue peaceful ends through peaceful means. ~ Martin Luther King, Jr

Unconditional war can no longer lead to unconditional victory. It can no longer serve to settle disputes. It can no longer be of concern to great powers alone. For a nuclear disaster, spread by winds and waters and fear, could well engulf the great and the small, the rich and the poor, the committed and the uncommitted alike. Mankind must put an end to war or war will put an end to mankind ~ John F. Kennedy

I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity. ~ Dwight David Eisenhower

One is left with the horrible feeling now that war settles nothing; that to win a war is as disastrous as to lose one. ~ Agatha Christie

There never was a good war or a bad peace ~ Benjamin Franklin:

In peace the sons bury their fathers, but in war the fathers bury their sons. ~ Croesus

We seek peace, knowing that peace is the climate of freedom. ~ Dwight D. Eisenhower:

When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace. ~ Jimi Hendrix

Imagine all the people living life in peace. You may say I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one. I hope someday you’ll join us, and the world will live as one. ~ John Lennon

The real and lasting victories are those of peace, and not of war ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson

Peace is not the product of terror or fear.
Peace is not the silence of cemeteries.
Peace is not the silent result of violent repression.
Peace is the generous, tranquil contribution of all to the good of all.
Peace is dynamism. Peace is generosity.
It is right and it is duty.
~ Oscar Romero

You can’t shake hands with a clenched fist
~ Indira Gandhi

Why me?” That is the soldier’s first question, asked each morning as the patrols go out and each evening as the night settles around the foxholes. ~ William Broyles Jr

If my soldiers were to begin to think, not one would remain in the ranks ~ Frederick The Great

I didn’t raise my boy to be a soldier, I brought him up to be my pride and joy, Who dares to put a musket to his shoulder, To kill some other mother’s boy

In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends. ~ Martin Luther King, Jr.


The Declaration of Independence - In 1776 representatives of the thirteen United Colonies lawfully declared their freedom and independence from tyrannical English government. Turning to the “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,” they asserted that as one people they were free to alter their monarchial form of government and to organize a new one on such principles as seemed most likely to secure their unalienable rights. Laying the foundation for a future constitutional government, the signers declared:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

The Declaration asserted that government by consent was an unalienable right and employed it in three ways. The first involves the unalienable right to institute a government by the consent of the governed. The Declaration notes that “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” President George Washington declared, “The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their constitutions of government.” Abraham Lincoln called this “the leading principle - the sheet anchor of American republicanism.” This principle means that specific civil governments lawfully exist only at the behest of the people. Civil government cannot create or perpetuate itself without running roughshod over the basis of our political system. Civil government may not reorganize itself for the sake of expediency. Likewise, the federal government may exercise only those civil powers that are specifically granted to it in the Constitution. If a power is not granted, the general government does not possess it and therefore may not act as though it does possess it. Congress may not exercise jurisdiction not extended nor may it vest independent agencies with such jurisdiction.

The general principle of consent is found throughout the Constitution. The Preamble asserts, “We the People, of the United States … do ordain and establish this Constitution ….” The whole notion of constitutional government is predicated upon the requirement that people consent together to establish the form of civil government, and that political sovereignty is delegated directly to that government. Article I, section 1 reinforces this proposition. It notes that only the legislative powers specifically “granted” by the people of the United States may be exercised by the Congress. Therefore, Congress may only legislate with respect to those objects or purposes the people extended to Congress in writing.

Government by consent is based on the unalienable right to disestablish a tyrannical or lawless government, that is, the right to alter or abolish the form of government. The Declaration asserts:

[W]henever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

The phrase “destructive of these ends” refers to the unalienable rights which civil government is instituted to preserve. It was the right to alter or abolish the form of government which the people exercised when independence was declared. The nature of this right presumes that it is not to be exercised lightly. If wrongly employed, it could constitute treason.

“when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

In other words, the people have the authority to correct, rebuke and alter their government, but not for light or transient reasons.

Article V is an excellent example of the rule regarding alteration or abolition of the national form of government. Through amendments, the people can establish a more perfect government of the United States, that is, render it better able to accomplish its purpose of securing the God-given rights of the people.

The unalienable right of government by consent is given by God to all people. Its legal expression is called government by consent and it has three components. The first is the right and duty of the people (not the civil government itself) to establish, institute or form a civil government. This takes into account the second component, the obligation to lay the foundation of that government on true principles, including the right to organize its civil powers in any lawful way so that it secures these and other rights. Thus the right of government by consent is not the right to merely establish a civil government, but to establish a civil government under the rule of law with the objective of establishing and organizing it in such a way as to better secure the rights of the people.

The third component of government by consent is the right and duty of the people to disestablish a lawless government. Lawlessness implies tyrannical or despotic government. It takes into account factors which include the duration and design of the tyranny. It also includes considerations of how long the people will tolerate being reduced to slavery before they undertake a lawful alteration, disestablishment or abolition of that government. The words “establish” and “disestablish” are employed only for contrast. The Declaration uses the phrases “institute” and “alter or abolish.” Whether these words or those of “form” and “amend” are employed is not what is preeminently important. What is important is that the creation, alteration and destruction of the form of government, subject to certain procedural and substantive prerequisites, are unalienable.

The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, however, rightly observe that the people can organize the power of government any way they desire, as long as they believe on good evidence that it will better secure their rights. The unalienable right to organize the powers of the federal government translated constitutionally into separate executive, legislative and judicial branches. It did not translate into extending to any of these branches the power to establish any independent agency or commission with power to exercise any rule-making authority binding on the society at large or segments thereof. Likewise, separating federal power into three constitutionally defined branches permits no combination of the power of those branches in an independent agency or commission. In short, it permits no fourth branch of general government, independent or otherwise, to be created by the government. The major issues regarding the organization of the federal government were settled by the people and recorded in the Constitution in 1787 and its amendments. The organization of the powers of the general government has not been entrusted by the Constitution to the general government itself.


Do Canadians have to obey US laws? US made laws, bills or sanctions only apply to US citizens “within” the United States. Absolutely no country has to comply with any US made laws, bill or sanction. The US government was not elected to be leader of Canada or any other country. Canada is sovereign nation. We have the right to self-government and no other country including the United States can interfere, influence, meddle or dictate Canadian policy and rule of law. US citizens are subject to the laws of the country they are guests of or entered illegally as illegal immigrants or contractors. In the case of US mercenary group Blackwater the US government might have given them immunity but immunity only applies from prosecution “within” the United States. Blackwater, US contractors, diplomats and citizens are subject to all laws of Iraq or any other country they enter at the request of US State Department. What Blackwater does is murder innocent people. No matter where you go in the World murder is a capitol crime. There is no immunity for murder - not even in the US.

Iran does not have to comply with US imposed sanctions and neither does any other country. The US seizing of Iranian assets (namely money) is illegal because the US does not have authority over any other country, their people, their government, their military or their wealth. Even in Iraq the US has absolutely no legal authority. The Iraqi people have the right and duty to their country and to their people to resist the US occupation using as much force as required to force the end of the occupation and withdrawal of all foreign troops from Iraq. Despite what the US White House claims the Iraqi people are innocent of any charge of terrorism because no Iraqi citizen was involved in 9/11. Iraq did not attack the US. Afghanistan did not attack the US. No armed attack occurred against the US. No act of war occurred against the US. There is no war against terror it is the US White House’s war of terror. They staged an attack against their own country and people so as to trick the US people into backing wars of aggression against innocent countries. The White House took away the US people’s rights and liberties - not a phantom enemy they call al Qaeda. Qaeda Arab translation is “the base”. Al Qaeda is the CIA’s base for criminal acts of terror, assassination and sabotage. Al Qaeda was created by the US to implement US policies around the World. When they air alleged al Qaeda tapes and videos the US is actually the ones making new threats against the US and other countries. The people of Iraq are resisting the illegal invasion and occupation of their country. The people of Afghanistan and their legal Taliban government are resisting the the illegal invasion and occupation of their country. The Resistance movement is not al Qaeda or terrorists. The Resistance is being named Al Qaeda and terrorists by the invaders who are guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

US made laws, bills or sanctions only apply to US citizens “within” the United States. Absolutely no country has to comply with any US made laws. The moment US citizens leave the United States they are subject to the laws of the country they are guests of or entered illegally as illegal immigrants or contractors.

Any law that the US imposes on the Iraqi people for any length of time is not legal nor binding. US laws only apply to US citizens. US sanctions only apply to US businesses. Sovereignty is the exclusive right to complete political (including legislative, judicial, and or executive) control over an area of governance, people, or oneself. A sovereign is the supreme lawmaking authority, subject to no other. The US has no right to impose their will on Iraq, Iran or any other country.


The US government have been stating for the past 2 decades that it’s only a question of when a pandemic will come, not if it will come. Influenza A pandemics come every 30 years or so, severe ones every hundred years or so. The last pandemic, the Hong Kong flu, occurred in 1968 - killing 34,000 Americans. In 1918, the Great Flu Epidemic killed more than 500,000 Americans. So many millions died in other countries, they couldn’t bury the bodies. Young healthy adults, in the prime of their lives in the morning, drowning in their own inflammation by noon, grossly discolored by sunset, were dead at midnight. Their body’s own broad-spectrum natural antibiotics, called antimicrobial peptides, seemed nowhere to be found. An overwhelming immune response triggered by the over the counter drug Aspirin caused the white blood cells to release large amounts of inflammatory agents called cytokines and chemokines into the lungs of the doomed - resulting in millions of unnecessary deaths in 1918.

Today we now have another Influenza A pandemic, or so the US government has declared. The distinctions from this outbreak and past outbreaks is that this H1N1 influenza A viral outbreak was man made and intentionally released by the US government. The virus was created in the biological weapons research labs at Fort Detrick Maryland. It was created as a biological weapon for a political agenda. It was created to target a specific group of people in the US public. It is not contagious and because of this the US government had to declare a medical state of emergency in order to trick people into being infected with the H1N1 virus. The only way for anyone to be infected with the virus is to have the virus injected directly into the blood stream - via a syringe (a vaccine). Millions of people became infected with the H1N1 virus after they received the live virus laced vaccine or H1N1 drug treatment that also contained the live virus. Those who the government claimed were infected by the H1N1 virus by coming into contact with another person with the virus, were actually sick with regular flu virus (the CDC maintains that seasonal flu kills 36000 Americans each year compared to just 3,198 H1N1 death for all of North America). Seasonal flu kills between 4,000 to 8,000 Canadians and between 250,000 and 500,000 people worldwide each year. Yet as of late last week, seven months into this outbreak, H1N1 has killed a little as 161 Canadians and an estimated 6,260 people around the globe. The US government distorted the facts in order to launch a nation wide vaccination program. Millions are now infected with the H1N1 virus as a direct result of being vaccinated - the vaccine is the pandemic.

All those who have been infected with the US government made and dispersed H1N1 virus can be cured - naturally, safely and in most cases free of charge. The WHO and the CDC have both stated that there is no cure for the H1N1 virus. There are many cures. A group of scientists from UCLA published a remarkable paper in the prestigious journal, Nature. In the article, the UCLA group confirmed two other recent studies, showing that a naturally occurring steroid hormone - a hormone most of us take for granted - was, in effect, a potent antibiotic. Instead of directly killing bacteria and viruses, the steroid hormone under question increases the body’s production of a remarkable class of proteins, called antimicrobial peptides. The 200 known antimicrobial peptides directly and rapidly destroy the cell walls of bacteria, fungi, and viruses, including the influenza virus, and play a key role in keeping the lungs free of infection. The steroid hormone that showed these remarkable antibiotic properties was plain old vitamin D - 2,000 units of vitamin D every day for the duration of the influenza season.

Vitamin D is unique in the vitamin world by virtue of three facts.

First, it’s the only known precursor of a potent steroid hormone, calcitriol, or activated vitamin D. Most other vitamins are antioxidants or co-factors in enzyme reactions. Activated vitamin D - like all steroid hormones - damasks the genome, turning protein production on and off, as your body requires. That is, vitamin D regulates genetic expression in hundreds of tissues throughout your body. This means it has as many potential mechanisms of action as genes it damasks.

Second, vitamin D does not exist in appreciable quantities in normal human diets. True, you can get several thousand units in a day if you feast on sardines for breakfast, herring for lunch and salmon for dinner. The only people who ever regularly consumed that much fish are peoples, like the Inuit, who live at the extremes of latitude. The milk Americans depend on for their vitamin D contains no naturally occurring vitamin D; instead, the U.S. government requires fortified milk to be supplemented with vitamin D, but only with what we now know to be a paltry 100 units per eight-ounce glass.

The vitamin D steroid hormone system has always had its origins in the skin, not in the mouth. Until quite recently, when dermatologists and governments began warning us about the dangers of sunlight, humans made enormous quantities of vitamin D where humans have always made it, where naked skin meets the ultraviolet B radiation of sunlight. We just cannot get adequate amounts of vitamin D from our diet. If we don’t expose ourselves to ultraviolet light, we must get vitamin D from dietary supplements.

The third way vitamin D is different from other vitamins is the dramatic difference between natural vitamin D nutrition and the modern one. Today, most humans only make about a thousand units of vitamin D a day from sun exposure; many people, such as the elderly or African Americans, make much less than that. How much did humans normally make? A single, twenty-minute, full body exposure to summer sun will trigger the delivery of 20,000 units of vitamin D into the circulation of most people within 48 hours. Twenty thousand units, that’s the single most important fact about vitamin D. Compare that to the 100 units you get from a glass of milk, or the several hundred daily units the U.S. government recommend as “Adequate Intake.” It’s what we call an “order of magnitude” difference.

Humans evolved naked in sub-equatorial Africa, where the sun shines directly overhead much of the year and where our species must have obtained tens of thousands of units of vitamin D every day, in spite of our skin developing heavy melanin concentrations (racial pigmentation) for protecting the deeper layers of the skin. Even after humans migrated to temperate latitudes, where our skin rapidly lightened to allow for more rapid vitamin D production, humans worked outdoors. However, in the last three hundred years, we began to work indoors; in the last one hundred years, we began to travel inside cars; in the last several decades, we began to lather on sunblock and consciously avoid sunlight. All of these things lower vitamin D blood levels. The inescapable conclusion is that vitamin D levels in modern humans are not just low - they are aberrantly low.

In the last several years, dozens of medical studies have called attention to worldwide vitamin D deficiency, especially among African Americans and the elderly, the two groups most likely to die from influenza. Cancer, heart disease, stroke, autoimmune disease, depression, chronic pain, depression, gum disease, diabetes, hypertension, and a number of other diseases have recently been associated with vitamin D deficiency. Was it possible that influenza was as well?

There exists 3 medical mysteries: (1) although the influenza virus exists in the population year-round, influenza is a wintertime illnesses; (2) children with vitamin D deficient rickets are much more likely to suffer from respiratory infections; (3) the elderly in most countries are much more likely to die in the winter than the summer (excess wintertime mortality), and most of that excess mortality, although listed as cardiac, is, in fact, due to influenza.

Vitamin D, specifically Vitamin D deficiency explain these three mysteries, mysteries that account for hundreds of thousands of deaths every year? Studies have found the influenza virus is present in the population year-around; why is it a wintertime illness? Even the common cold got its name because it is common in cold weather and rare in the summer. Vitamin D blood levels are at their highest in the summer but reach their lowest levels during the flu and cold season. Could such a simple explanation explain these mysteries?

The British researcher, Dr. R. Edgar Hope-Simpson, was the first to document the most mysterious feature of epidemic influenza, its wintertime surfeit and summertime scarcity. He theorized that an unknown “seasonal factor” was at work, a factor that might be affecting innate human immunity. Hope-Simpson was a general practitioner who became famous in the late 1960’s after he discovered the cause of shingles. British authorities bestowed every prize they had on him, not only because of the importance of his discovery, but because he made the discovery own his own, without the benefit of a university appointment, and without any formal training in epidemiology (the detective branch of medicine that methodically searches for clues about the cause of disease).

After his work on shingles, Hope-Simpson spent the rest of his working life studying influenza. He concluded a “seasonal factor” was at work, something that was regularly and predictably impairing human immunity in the winter and restoring it in the summer. He discovered that communities widely separated by longitude, but which shared similar latitude, would simultaneously develop influenza. He discovered that influenza epidemics in Great Britain in the 17th and 18th century occurred simultaneously in widely separated communities, before modern transportation could possibly explain its rapid dissemination. Hope-Simpson concluded a “seasonal factor” was triggering these epidemics. Whatever it was, he was certain that the deadly “crop” of influenza that sprouts around the winter solstice was intimately involved with solar radiation. Hope-Simpson predicted that, once discovered, the “seasonal factor” would “provide the key to understanding most of the influenza problems confronting us.”

Hope-Simpson had no way of knowing that vitamin D has profound effects on human immunity, no way of knowing that it increases production of broad-spectrum antimicrobial peptides, peptides that quickly destroy the influenza virus. We have only recently learned how vitamin D increases production of antimicrobial peptides while simultaneously preventing the immune system from releasing too many inflammatory cells, called chemokines and cytokines, into infected lung tissue.

In 1918, when medical scientists did autopsies on some of the fifty million people who died during the 1918 flu pandemic, they were amazed to find destroyed respiratory tracts; sometimes these inflammatory cytokines had triggered the complete destruction of the normal epithelial cells lining the respiratory tract. It was as if the flu victims had been attacked and killed by their own immune systems. This is the severe inflammatory reaction that vitamin D has recently been found to prevent.

Clinical research has shown that annual fluctuations in vitamin D levels explain the seasonality of influenza. The periodic seasonal fluctuations in 25-hydroxy-vitamin D levels, which cause recurrent and predictable wintertime vitamin D deficiency, predispose human populations to influenza epidemics. That influenza is a symptom of vitamin D deficiency in the same way that an unusual form of pneumonia (pneumocystis carinii) is a symptom of AIDS. George Bernard Shaw was right when he said, “the characteristic microbe of a disease might be a symptom instead of a cause.”

Vitamin D explains the following 14 observations:

1. Why the flu predictably occurs in the months following the winter solstice, when vitamin D levels are at their lowest,

2. Why the flu disappears in the months following the summer solstice,

3. Why influenza is more common in the tropics during the rainy season,

4. Why the cold and rainy weather associated with El Nino Southern Oscillation (ENSO), which drives people indoors and lowers vitamin D blood levels, is associated with influenza,

5. Why the incidence of influenza is inversely correlated with outdoor temperatures,

6. Why children exposed to sunlight are less likely to get colds,

7. Why cod liver oil (which contains vitamin D) reduces the incidence of viral respiratory infections,

8. Why scientists found that vitamin D-producing UVB lamps reduced colds and flu in schoolchildren and factory workers,

9. Why scientists found that volunteers, deliberately infected with a weakened flu virus - first in the summer and then again in the winter - show significantly different clinical courses in the different seasons,

10. Why the elderly who live in countries with high vitamin D consumption, like Norway, are less likely to die in the winter,

11. Why children with vitamin D deficiency and rickets suffer from frequent respiratory infections,

12. Why an observant physician (Rehman), who gave high doses of vitamin D to children who were constantly sick from colds and the flu, found the treated children were suddenly free from infection,

13. Why the elderly are so much more likely to die from heart attacks in the winter rather than in the summer,

14. Why African Americans, with their low vitamin D blood levels, are more likely to die from influenza and pneumonia than Whites are.

High doses of Vitamin D kills the flu. The governments keep natural medicine very quiet because there is no money in it. Vitamin D increases the immune system by 3-5 times and is BETTER than any vaccine at helping the immune system beat both the h5n1 (bird flu) virus and the H1N1 (Swine Flu) virus.

Research from PubMed: In 1981, R. Edgar Hope-Simpson proposed that a ’seasonal stimulus’ intimately associated with solar radiation explained the remarkable seasonality of epidemic influenza. Solar radiation triggers robust seasonal vitamin D production in the skin; vitamin D deficiency is common in the winter, and activated vitamin D, 1,25(OH)2D, a steroid hormone, has profound effects on human immunity. 1,25(OH)2D acts as an immune system modulator, preventing excessive expression of inflammatory cytokines and increasing the ‘oxidative burst’ potential of macrophages. Perhaps most importantly, it dramatically stimulates the expression of potent anti-microbial peptides, which exist in neutrophils, monocytes, natural killer cells, and in epithelial cells lining the respiratory tract where they play a major role in protecting the lung from infection. Volunteers inoculated with live attenuated influenza virus are more likely to develop fever and serological evidence of an immune response in the winter. Vitamin D deficiency predisposes children to respiratory infections. Ultraviolet radiation (either from artificial sources or from sunlight) reduces the incidence of viral respiratory infections, as does cod liver oil (which contains vitamin D). An interventional study showed that vitamin D reduces the incidence of respiratory infections in children.

One reason why the flu may be more contagious in the winter time is because of the lack of sunlight. During the winter months people spend most of the time indoors. During the summer months people spend most of the time outdoors. The lack of sunlight, when we find shelter from the cold, prevents our skin from producing sufficient levels of vitamin D. There is now documented evidence about the roles of solar ultraviolet-B radiation and vitamin D in reducing case-fatality rates from the 1918-1918 influenza Pandemic in EU. “There are two mechanisms whereby vitamin D can reduce the risk of death once the pandemic influenza virus infection took hold: reduced production of pro-inflammatory cytokines and reduced risk of bacterial pneumonia. The type of vitamin D which can fight viruses can ONLY be made from natural sunlight. It is known as D3, which is made from sunlight when 7-dehydrocholesterol in our skin reacts with UV light. It is then twice activated in the liver and kidney to make 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D. This attaches to receptors on genes that control their expression, which turn protein production on or off. Vitamin D regulates the expression of more than 1,000 genes throughout the body. They include genes in macrophages, cells in the immune system that, among other things, ATTACK AND DESTROY VIRUSES.”

Definition of Cure - To heal, to make well, to restore to good health. Vitamin D is therefore a cure for the H1N1 virus


Hundreds of thousands of swine flu shots for children have been recalled because tests indicate the vaccine doses lost some strength, government health officials said Tuesday.

The shots, made by Sanofi Pasteur, were distributed across the country last month and most have already been used, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The issue is the vaccine’s strength. Tests done before the shots were shipped showed that the vaccines were strong enough. But tests done weeks later indicated the strength had fallen slightly below required levels.

Why the potency dropped isn’t clear. “That’s the $64,000 question,” said Len Lavenda, a Sanofi Pasteur spokesman.

The answer to the mystery is simple. The H1N1 virus cannot survive past 7 days. Biological weapons expert Marc S Griswold, who travelled to Mexico with President Obama on April 16, 2009 is the first documented and confirmed A-H1N1 swine flu infection case. The agent is patient zero. Patient zero infected several members of his family in Anne Arundel County, prompting assurances from the White House that the president was safe.

Marc S. Griswold, a former Secret Service agent who was serving as the lead advance special agent for Energy Secretary Steven Chu on president Obama’s April trip to Mexico, said in an interview that the minor cough he developed in Mexico grew into swine flu. Although he has recovered and is back to work, he and his family have watched in shock as his illness has sparked national security concerns, severely strained his relationship with his brother (Griswold probably infected his nephew) and put his family at the center of rumors and panic in his Severna Park neighborhood. Griswold said in frustration on the front steps of his house. “We’ve been told we’re not contagious. We’re already past the seven-day mark for that.”

How did the H1N1 virus spread globally?

Biological weapons expert Marc S. Griswold returned from Mexico on April 18, officials said, on United Flight 822 to Dulles International Airport. Washington Dulles International Airport is a public airport located 25 miles (40 km) west of the central business district of Washington, D.C., in Dulles, Virginia. Dulles is served by nearly a dozen U.S.-flagged carriers and nearly two dozen international carriers. Airlines serving Dulles provide non-stop service to over 80 domestic destinations and to over 40 international destinations. On a typical day, Dulles sees 1,000 to 1,200 flight operations.

When word got out that Agent Marc S. Griswold was infected with the H1N1 virus the government was only concerned about the health of president Obama. No one sought to contact everyone on the same flight as Griswold. If you have a confirmed case of an influenza outbreak the immediate response is for the government to immediately track down everyone who came in contact with Patient Zero and initiate a quarantine. No one, not even Obama, bothered to spring into to action to prevent the spread of the H1N1 virus that the WHO has declared a pandemic. Obama, the WHO and the CDC failed to do their job to protect the people from this influenza outbreak. It is as if they wanted it to happen. Instead of quarantining Griswold, his family, and everyone who came in contact with Griswold on United Airlines Flight 822 they allowed the H1N1 influenza virus to spread. Dulles international airport was the hub for the H1N1 virus to spread globally.

Obama has a responsibility to the people. As president he failed as miserably as George W Bush’s handling of Hurricane Katrina. Obama’s complete inaction shows complacency. Inaction could also imply conspiracy. Perhaps the rumours are true. Did Obama order a biological attack against Mexico and his own country? What was Obama’s motive to unleash a biological weapons grade influenza strain? What was the means? What opportunity did he have? Motive could be the Tax Day Tea Party which millions of ordinary US citizens participated in as a nation wide protest against Obama’s government policies and out of control spending that occurred on April 15, 2009 - the day before Obama landed in Mexico. Not even in office 100 days the people were angrily protesting and petitioning Obama and his government for change. Did Obama fear they would ask for his resignation? Did he react out of anger because the US people no longer saw him as their saviour and out of anger ordered the H1N1 virus released? He surely had the means. Fort Detrick where this new viral infection was created is just outside Washington DC. He did have Air Force One at his disposal as a means to transport the virus from Fort Detrick to Mexico. Air Force one is considered US soil no matter where it lands and as such no country can board it or inspect it. He did have an excuse to go to Mexico right away. Mexico had a very violent and deadly drug war going on until the first case of H1N1 virus was reported in Mexico. Before the H1N1 virus outbreak the news was reporting daily about the battle between the Mexican government and the drug lords. Bodies were being discovered by US border guards on a daily bases. That has all but stop as a result of the H1N1 flu.

Bioterrorism is terrorism by intentional release or dissemination of biological agents (bacteria, viruses, or toxins); these may be in a naturally-occurring or in a human-modified form.

According to the US-based Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): A bioterrorism attack is the deliberate release of viruses, bacteria, or other germs (agents) used to cause illness or death in people, animals, or plants. These agents are typically found in nature, but it is possible that they could be changed to increase their ability to cause disease, make them resistant to current medicines, or to increase their ability to be spread into the environment.

The very definition of bioterrorism (deliberate release of viruses, bacteria, or other germs (agents) used to cause illness or death in people, animals, or plants.) makes the H1N1 vaccine a bioweapon because it contains an adjuvant (additive) designed to weaken the immune system, and replicated RNA from the virus responsible for the 1918 pandemic Spanish flu, causing global sickness and mass death.


Looks like we are in for a long cold winter. One thing for sure is that millions of people are going to pay dearly to heat their homes this winter. Those with a tight budget are going to be affected the most. Any increase in electrical, gas or oil costs is going to reduce their budget drastically. Well Paul W Kincaid, Canadian owner and inventor of the line of products is going to let you in on a secret that will help you save hundreds of dollars on your home heating bill this winter. This is a free tip, a gift.

For the past 5 years Paul W Kincaid has been experimenting with several ways to help you heat your home. The most cost effective heating source is the ordinary incandescent light bulb. For as little as $1 you have a heating source that will help you heat your home.

How many of you have accidentally touched a light bulb that is on? Its very painful. Your skin has just suffered a first degree burn from touching the very hot light bulb. How many have gotten a first degree burn from touching a baseboard heater? Not very many if at all because the baseboard heater isn’t as hot as the light bulb. The ordinary $1 incandescent light bulb is a very cheap source of heat. The higher the wattage of the light bulb the hotter the lighter bulb will be. A 100 watt bulb will give off more heat than a 50 watt incandescent light bulb and even more heat than a mercury contaminated fluorescent light bulb. The best kept secret is that an incandescent light bulb is a very cheap source of heat. Paul W Kincaid has been using 100 watt incandescent light bulbs to help heat his residence. By using incandescent light bulbs your heating bill will be reduced as your oil furnace, baseboard heater or gas furnace will not have to kick on as much. A baseboard heater consumes as much as 1000 watts and more to maintain a comfortable room temperature. An incandescent light bulb can help maintain that same comfortable room temperature using a fraction of the energy and at a fraction of the cost. The best light fixtures to use are the ones like the one pictured at the top of this article. The metal reflector absorbs the heat from the incandescent light bulb and acts as a heat element. The incandescent light bulb is very hot and the heat will transfer to the metal reflector shade making the shade a heat source too.

A word of caution. The deflector shade will get hot. If you have children make sure they are out of reach. The ideal height is as low as possible to the ground. Heat will rise so if you place it too high you will defeat the purpose of the light as a heating source. You don’t see a baseboard heater installed near the ceiling. They are always installed just a few inches off of the floor because in order for them to be effective the heat must be able to rise and fill the room. The same applies to using an incandescent light bulb as a heating source. The lower the better.

See for yourself. Go ahead and leave the lights on. Use 100 watts incandescent light bulbs in the winter to help heat your home and lower your heating bill. The metal deflector light sockets in the photo can be bought at your local hardware store including Home Depot, Canadian Tire and any photography store.

Paul W Kincaid is currently working on developing new technology that will drastically reduce our dependency on oil. FuelReducer’s H2O - Water for Fuel Project is focusing on fuelling the World with sea water instead of oil or gas. FuelReducer has recently developed a prototype that separates water (H2O) into Hydrogen and Oxygen using a low radio frequency. The amount of energy needed to split the water into a fuel and the life giving oxygen is very small. The applications are endless. Hydrogen fuel from sea water can be used to fuel electrical power generators, gas stoves, emergency power generators, boat engines, barbecues and gas furnaces to name a few.

By using less oil and natural gas to heat your home means a drop in demand for oil and natural gas. This will strongly deter gas and oil companies from advocating the US government to attack oil and natural gas rich foreign states. Both US attacks against Iraq and Afghanistan were lobbied for by the US oil companies. The US oil companies donated millions to both Bush and Obama’s presidential bids. They put both Bush and Obama in office. They put them there because both Bush and Obama agreed to steal the oil and natural gas of oil rich countries like Iraq and Afghanistan and put the US oil industry donors in control. The only way for Bush and Obama to steal the very lucrative natural resources of Iraq and Afghanistan was with wars - US wars of terror, US wars of aggressions against both Iraq and Afghanistan.

Using sea water as a fuel source will wipe out the warmongering US oil companies like Halliburton (a United States-based oilfield services corporation which Dick Cheney headed until he became vice-president of the United States. Halliburton has close to 300 subsidiaries, affiliates, branches, brands and divisions worldwide most of which are now building the Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline), Chevron Corporation (In 1992, George P. Shultz (Ronald Reagan’s Secretary of State from 1982–1989), who was a board member of Chevron Corporation, recommended Rice for a spot on the Chevron board. Chevron was pursuing a $10 billion development project in Kazakhstan and, as a Soviet specialist, Rice knew the President of Kazakhstan, Nursultan Nazarbayev. She traveled to Kazakhstan on Chevron’s behalf and, in honor of her work, in 1993, Chevron named a 129,000-ton supertanker SS Condoleezza Rice. In 2001, Chevron Corporation acquired Texaco to form ChevronTexaco.), ExxonMobil, CentGas (consortium formed in the 1990s to develop and build the Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline to link Turkmenistan’s abundant proven natural gas reserves with growing markets in Pakistan through Afghanistan), Union Oil Company of California (Unocal lobbied the US government to attack Afghanistan and remove the Taliban government and replace it with a US controlled government. On August 10, 2005, Unocal merged with Chevron Corporation and became a wholly owned subsidiary. Unocal has now ceased operations as an independent company, but continues to conduct many operations as Union Oil Company of California, a Chevron company.). It will stop the US aggressions against sovereign foreign states with vast oil and natural gas supplies. Using sea water as the fuel for the World will also dramatically lower pollution output that carbon base fuels produce. Using sea water as the fuel for the World means the total elimination of harmful emissions.

Should Obama be stripped of the Nobel Peace Prize?

Obama waited until after he was declared the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize recipient to announce an escalation of the US war of aggression against Afghanistan by sending 30,000 more troops.

Text of Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize speech

… the most profound issue surrounding my receipt of this prize is the fact that I am the Commander-in-Chief of a nation in the midst of two wars. One of these wars is winding down. The other is a conflict that America did not seek; one in which we are joined by forty three other countries - including Norway - in an effort to defend ourselves and all nations from further attacks.

Still, we are at war, and I am responsible for the deployment of thousands of young Americans to battle in a distant land. Some will kill. Some will be killed.

Why Obama should be stripped of Nobel Peace Prize

Yes Obama you are Commander-in-Chief of a nation in the midst of two wars. Wars that the US started. Wars of aggression against two innocent countries. The war of aggression against Afghanistan was a war that the US sought. The US sought to overthrow the Taliban government in 1998, 3 years prior to the attacks of September 11, 2001. Attacks that Afghanistan nor its Taliban government had no part in. The evidence is clear and indisputable. Afghanistan did not attack the US. The US attacked Afghanistan. None of the hijackers of 9/11 were Taliban or Afghan citizens. The hijackers were Saudi Arabian. There was never a threat from Afghanistan.

The US decided in 1998 to overthrow the Taliban government and install a pro US government. Feb. 28, 1998 - Unocal VP International Relations addressed US House of Representatives clearly stating that the Taliban government should be removed and replaced by a government acceptable to his company. He argued that creation of a 42 inch oil pipeline across Afghanistan would yield a Western profit increase of 500% by 2015. At the request of US Unocal Corporation the US government decided in 1998 to overthrow the Taliban government and take complete control of the Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline (TAP or TAPI)- a natural gas and oil pipeline that US oil companies is to build to transport Caspian Sea natural gas from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan into Pakistan and then to India. The US is joined by forty three other countries - including Norway - in a war of aggression against the country of Afghanistan. The US and forty three other countries are all guilty of war crimes, crimes against peace and crimes against humanity. Their motive is not one of self-defense or peace it is simply greed - to steal the Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline building project and revenue away from the Afghan people and give it all to US oil companies.

Regarding the placement of the Unocal Pipeline, a US Official delivered this ultimatum to the Taliban (via the Pakistani delegation acting as their interlocutors): “Either you accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we bury you under a carpet of bombs.” ~ May 15, 2001

Niaz Naik, a former Pakistani Foreign Secretary, was told by senior American officials in mid-July that military action against Afghanistan would go ahead by the middle of October. ~ July 2001

Oct. 7, 2001 US Military unprovoked armed aerial bombardment began in Afghanistan without any UN Resolution authorizing such a blatant violation of International law and treaties.

The Purposes of the United Nations are:

1. To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;

Article 2

# All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.

# All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

War of aggression against Afghanistan key players

* Dick Cheney, VP: Until 2000 - President of Halliburton (in position to build the Afghan pipeline).
* Condoleezza Rice, National Security Advisor: 1991-2000 - Manager of Chevron Oil, and Kazakhstan go-between.
* Donald Evans, Sec. Commerce: former CEO, Tom Brown, Inc. (a $1.2 billion oil company).
* Gale Norton, Sec. Interior: former national chairwoman of the Coalition of Republican Environmental Advocates - funded by, among others, BP Amoco.
* Thomas White, Secretary of the Army: former Vice Chairman of Enron and a large shareholder of that company’s stock.

I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank. ” - Barack Obama Campaign Promise - October 27, 2007

President Barack Obama plans to send 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan over six months, an accelerated timetable — with an endgame built in — that would have the first Marines there as early as Christmas. Gasps and disbelief echoed through the Nobel Hall in Oslo as Barack Obama was unveiled as the winner of the 2009 Peace Prize. How can a warmonger (a warmonger is a pejorative term that is used to describe someone who is eager to encourage a people or nation to go to war.) receive a noble peace prize? The answer is money. With $trillions stolen from the US people and money laundered through the privately owned US Federal Reserve bankers anyone can buy any title or award.

It was a jarring moment when Obama, in the midst of receiving the Nobel peace prize, said of his troops in Afghanistan “will kill. Some will be killed.” He lauded Mohandas Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr., preachers of nonviolent action. But he added, “A nonviolent movement could not have halted Hitler’s armies. So what action, what movement is required to halt the US’s armies? According to Obama, who is now wrongly bestowed the honor of peace maker the only solution to stop his armies is violence. The legal precedents set by the Nuremberg Tribunal established that even Obama is responsible and accountable for his crimes . The establishment in law of crimes “against humanity” – acts offending the whole of mankind by their very nature – in Article 6 of the charter, and the attributing of individual (as opposed to state) responsibility for such crimes, voided any and all immunity shrouding the heads of state and the architects of mass atrocity.

The Nuremberg tribunals were the first international courts established to try crimes against international law, and they firmly established the responsibility of individuals, at whatever level they participate in atrocities, as well as denying immunity to political leaders. And substantively, crimes against humanity—meaning atrocities on a large scale—was articulated for the first time as a criminal offence, to be joined not long after by genocide as the most egregious offences in the international legal lexicon. Benjamin Ferencz, chief prosecutor for the United States at the tribunal, stated in the trial against the Nazi Einsatzgruppen: “The case we present is a plea of humanity to law … if these men be immune then the law has lost its meaning and man must live in fear”.

During the trial, the chief American prosecutor, Robert H. Jackson, stated:

To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.

Make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world and its all emanating from the US government. The US government is no different than Hitler’s Nazi Regime. The US government is carbon copying Hitler’s Nazi Imperialism. The US government is the axis of evil. The US government must be stopped. The US government must be held accountable. The US government must be put on trial for their crimes against humanity. The US government must face their Nuremberg Tribunal.

The Statue of Liberty represents, freedom, liberty, justice and also the friendship of foreign nations who also believe in freedom and fair and equal treatment for all. No terrorist took away the freedom, liberty and justice of the American people - the US government did that. Terrorists didn’t draw up the Patriot Act, create the Department of Homeland Security, spy illegally on Americans, launch 2 unprovoked armed attacks against 2 foreign states, abolish habeas corpus, kidnap, deport, torture and murder foreign civilians - the US government did that.

After 4+ years of research since retirement in 2002, I am 100% convinced that the attacks of September 11, 2001 were planned, organized, and committed by treasonous perpetrators that have infiltrated the highest levels of our government. It is now time to take our country back

We cannot let the pursuit of justice fail. Those of us in the military took an oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Just because we have retired does not make that oath invalid, so it is not just our responsibility, it is our duty to expose the real perpetrators of 9/11 and bring them to justice, no matter how hard it is, how long it takes, or how much we have to suffer to do it.”

We owe it to those who have gone before us who executed that same oath, and who are doing the same thing in Iraq and Afghanistan right now. Those of us who joined the military and faithfully executed orders that were given us had to trust our leaders. The violation and abuse of that trust is not only heinous, but ultimately the most accurate definition of treason!” - Lt. Col. Guy S. Razer, MS, U.S. Air Force (ret).

Americans, all it takes to have a trial is one solid piece of evidence to take to a federal judge. The US people don’t have to wait for the government to launch an investigation and trial into who ordered and executed the attacks of September 11, 2001. Evidence still exists even after 8 years and any American citizen or group can file charges with any federal court in the US with the evidence they have.

There is no statute of limitation on any charge involving a murder, including attempted. If a victim died (2,976 victims in the September 11, 2001 attacks) because of the attack and it can be proven, the bad guy(s) would face murder charges. Americans don’t need the White House or Congress’s permission to file charges of treason or murder - the US courts are bound by law to hear all cases put before them by the citizens of the United States of America.

Silenced by US for exposing US dirty little secret.
Benazir Bhutto declared in an interview just before she was assassinated by the CIA, that bin Laden Is Dead. bin Laden being confirmed dead means US NATO war in Afghanistan is a war crime. War in Afghainstan illegal under US, Canadian, British and International Law. Declared 6 minutes and 10 seconds (6:10) into the interview. Benazir Bhutto was assassinated December 27, 2007 just 13 days before a general election that she was well placed to win.

Benazir Bhutto paid the ultimate price for stating that the US imperial policy of propping up tin horn dictators causes world terrorism. She dared to say so. The late Benazir Bhutto laid “terrorism” at the White House doorstep, blaming US policies for causing, fueling and inspiring what US regimes call “terrorism”.

“When the United States aligns with dictatorships and totalitarian regimes, it compromises the basic democratic principles of its foundation — namely, life, liberty and justice for all. Dictatorships such as Musharraf’s suppress individual rights and freedoms and empower the most extreme elements of society. Oppressed citizens, unable to represent themselves through other means, often turn to extremism and religious fundamentalism.” ~ Benazir Bhutto,

The root causes of “terrorism” are US imperialistic policies, specifically the material and diplomatic support of dictators like Musharraf and earlier, Saddam Hussein and the Shah of Iran, et al. War is a racket fought by the masses for privileged elites, big corporations, and venal politicians like Bush. The war racket creates victims in the US and enemies –potential terrorists –abroad.

War policies benefit a tiny elite, no-bid contractors like Halliburton, Blackwater and their stockholders. The war against Iraq is financed by America’s working poor and middle classes who continue to pay for the war with their lives abroad and with their jobs, their retirement prospects, and their access to health care at home.

Just two days after 9/11, I learned from Congressional staffers that Republicans on Capitol Hill were already exploiting the atrocity, trying to use it to push through tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy. … We now know that from the very beginning, the Bush administration and its allies in Congress saw the terrorist threat not as a problem to be solved, but as a political opportunity to be exploited. The story of the latest terror plot makes the administration’s fecklessness and cynicism on terrorism clearer than ever. ~ Hoping for Fear, by Paul Krugman, Using Fear Commentary, NY Times

Americans are less safe under the dictators of “Imperial America”. According to the Pew Research Center, American skepticism about the war in Iraq has increased steadily from its inception. The war in Iraq, like American imperial policies cause terrorism.

The US, Canadian and NATO war of aggression against Afghanistan, that was illegally waged beginning October 7, 2001 wasn’t a war against terror but a war of aggression to take away the financial future of the Afghan people - the Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline

Central Asia Gas Pipeline, Ltd. (CentGas) was a consortium formed in the 1990s to develop a project to build the Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline to link Turkmenistan’s abundant proven natural gas reserves with growing markets in Pakistan. The Group led by Union Oil Company of California (Unocal) and Delta Oil Company, Ltd., of Saudi Arabia had also considered an extension of the line to the New Delhi area. Regional and political instability proved too great a challenge to overcome and the project eventually was cancelled after Unocal (the largest CentGas investor) withdrew from the consortium.

The Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline (TAP or TAPI) is a natural gas pipeline being developed by the Asian Development Bank. The pipeline will transport Caspian Sea natural gas from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan into Pakistan and then to India. The abbreviation comes from the first letters of those countries. Proponents of the project see it as a modern continuation of the Silk Road. The AfghanTaliban government was expected to receive 8% of the project’s revenue. But that figured was changed to 0% when the US decided that they wanted complete control of the Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline in 1998 and plans for an invasion were drawn up by the Clinton administration and executed by the George W Bush administration. They had decided in 1998 that they would devise a plan to take control of the Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline by staging a false flag terrorist attack on US soil and blame the Taliban government. The attacks of September 11, 2001 was the false flag attack that gave the US an excuse to attack Afghanistan and take the economic future of the Afghan people from them - the Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline.

The original project started in March 1995 when an inaugural memorandum of understanding between the governments of Turkmenistan and Pakistan for a pipeline project was signed. In August 1996, the Central Asia Gas Pipeline, Ltd. (CentGas) consortium for construction of a pipeline, led by U.S. oil company, Unocal was formed. On 27 October 1997, CentGas was incorporated in formal signing ceremonies in Ashgabat, Turkmenistan by several international oil companies along with the Government of Turkmenistan. In January 1998, the Taliban, selecting CentGas over Argentinian competitor Bridas Corporation, signed an agreement that allowed the proposed project to proceed. In June 1998, Russian Gazprom relinquished its 10% stake in the project. Unocal withdrew from the consortium on 8 December 1998 after negotiations between them and the Taliban government broke off. The Taliban wanted a bigger stake in the project for the Afghan people. The Taliban were seeking to guarantee the prosperity of the Afghan people as a result of the Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline but the US wasn’t willing to give the Afghan people their fair share of the profits.

The 1,680 kilometres (1,040 mi) pipeline will run from the Dauletabad gas field to Afghanistan. From there TAPI will be constructed alongside the highway running from Herat to Kandahar, and then via Quetta and Multan in Pakistan. The final destination of the pipeline will be the Indian town of Fazilka, near the border between Pakistan and India.

The US government used the Saudi 9/11 attacks as an excuse to use unlawful military force against Afghanistan. A crime against peace, in international law, refers to “planning, preparation, initiation, or waging of wars of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances, or participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the foregoing”. This definition of crimes against peace was first incorporated into the Nuremberg Principles and later included in the United Nations Charter.

To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.

The interdiction of aggressive war was confirmed and broadened by the United Nations’ Charter, which states in article 2, paragraph 4 that:

All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

* The “territorial integrity” rule means that it is a crime of aggression to use armed force with intent permanently to deprive a state of any part or parts of its territory, not excluding territories for the foreign affairs of which it is responsible;

* The “political independence” rule means that it is a crime of aggression to use armed force with intent to deprive a state of the entirety of one or more of the prerequisites of statehood, namely: defined territory, permanent population, constitutionally independent government and the means of conducting relations with other States;

* The “sovereignty” rule means that it is a crime of aggression to use armed force with intent to overthrow the government of a state or to impede its freedom to act unhindered, as it sees fit, throughout its jurisdiction.

The US began planning for and preparing for an attack against Afgahnistan in 1998 - a war of aggression with the sole purpose to take control of the Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline. The US plan to simply take control of the natural gas of Central Asia is laid out in the 1998 US Congress Hearing U.S. INTERESTS IN THE CENTRAL ASIAN REPUBLICS.

Excerpts from this Congressional hearing in 1998 whereby the US laid out its plan to seize control of the Central Asian Natural Gas and Oil:

48–119 CC







House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific,
Committee on International Relations,

Mr. BEREUTER. I would like to proceed to the subject of the hearing for today, U.S. interests in the Central Asian Republics. I do have a statement. One hundred years ago, Central Asia was the arena for a great game played by Czarist Russia, Colonial Britain, Napoleon’s France, and the Persian and the Ottoman Empires. Allegiances meant little during this struggle for empire building, where no single empire could gain the upper hand. One hundred years later, the collapse of the Soviet Union has unleashed a new great game, where the interests of the East India Trading Company have been replaced by those of Unocal and Total, and many other organizations and firms.

Today the Subcommittee examines the interests of a new contestant in this new great game, the United States. The five countries which make up Central Asia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan, attained their independence in 1991, and have once again captured worldwide attention due to the phenomenal reserves of oil and natural gas located in the region. In their desire for political stability as well as economic independence and prosperity, these nations are anxious to establish relations with the United States. In response, last November, Secretary of Energy Frederico Pena led a Presidential mission to the Caspian-Central Asian region for discussions. The area’s energy resources were also discussed during November visits to Washington of Kazakhstani President Nazarbayev and Uzbek Prime Minister Sultanov.

Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan possess large reserves of oil and natural gas, both on-shore and off-shore in the Caspian Sea, which they urgently seek to exploit. Uzbekistan has oil and gas reserves that may permit it to be self-sufficient in energy and gain revenue through exports. Estimates of Central Asian oil reserves vary widely, but are usually said to rival those of the North Sea or Alaska. More accurate estimates of oil and gas resources await wider exploration and the drilling of test wells.

Stated U.S. policy goals regarding energy resources in this region include fostering the independence of the States and their ties to the West; breaking Russia’s monopoly over oil and gas transport routes; promoting Western energy security through diversified suppliers; encouraging the construction of east-west pipelines that do not transit Iran; and denying Iran dangerous leverage over the Central Asian economies.

In addition, as has been noted by Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott, the United States seeks to discourage any one country from gaining control over the region, but rather urges all responsible States to cooperate in the exploitation of regional oil and other resources.

Central Asia would seem to offer significant new investment opportunities for a broad range of American companies which, in turn, will serve as a valuable stimulus to the economic development of the region. Japan, Turkey, Iran, Western Europe, and China are all pursuing economic development opportunities and challenging Russian dominance in the region. It is essential that U.S. policymakers understand the stakes involved in Central Asia as we seek to craft a policy that serves the interests of the United States and U.S. business.

On the other hand, some question the importance of the region to U.S. interests, and dispute the significance of its resources to U.S. national security interests. Others caution that it will take a great deal of time and money to bring these resources to world markets. Still others point to civil and ethnic conflicts in Tajikistan and Afghanistan as a reason to avoid involvement beyond a minimal diplomatic presence in the area.

Unocal foresees a pipeline which would become part of a regional system that will gather oil from existing pipeline infrastructure in Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Russia. The 1,040-mile long oil pipeline would extend south through Afghanistan to an export terminal that would be constructed on the Pakistan coast. This 42-inch diameter pipeline will have a shipping capacity of one million barrels of oil per day. The estimated cost of the project, which is similar in scope to the trans-Alaska pipeline, is about $2.5 billion.

The Central Asia and Caspian region is blessed with abundant oil and gas that can enhance the lives of the region’s residents, and provide energy for growth in both Europe and Asia. The impact of these resources on U.S. commercial interests and U.S. foreign policy is also significant. Without peaceful settlement of the conflicts in the region, cross-border oil and gas pipelines are not likely to be built. We urge the Administration and the Congress to give strong support to the U.N.-led peace process in Afghanistan. The U.S. Government should use its influence to help find solutions to all of the region’s conflicts.

U.S. assistance in developing these new economies will be crucial to business success. We thus also encourage strong technical assistance programs throughout the region. Specifically, we urge repeal or removal of section 907 of the Freedom Support Act. This section unfairly restricts U.S. Government assistance to the government of Azerbaijan and limits U.S. influence in the region.

Developing cost-effective export routes for Central Asian resources is a formidable task, but not an impossible one. Unocal and other American companies like it are fully prepared to undertake the job and to make Central Asia once again into the crossroads it has been in the past. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. BEREUTER. .. I do recognize and agree with you about the place where the major oil demand is growing in the world. I understand why a southern directed route is more advantageous to serve that. I heard what you had to say about the inadequacy of a pipeline to serve the oil potential if exploited in that region. I wonder if you could address this point to start with. Given the long history of violence in Afghanistan, can Unocal reasonably expect a pipeline to remain secure?

Mr. MARESCA. First, on the question about Afghanistan, of course we’re not in a phase where we are negotiating on a contract because there is no recognized government really to negotiate with. However, we have had talks and briefings with all the factions. It is clear that they all understand the significance for their country of this pipeline project, and they all support it, all of them. They all want it. They would like it to start tomorrow. All of the factions would like it to start tomorrow if we could do it.

So I believe that over time, if it’s built, it would be secure. I believe that the Afghans will see it as a national asset once it’s built. It will provide them with many millions of dollars in transit fees. It will provide them with real jobs and technology and a lot of other things. It’s not going to be built until there is a single Afghan Government.

So what did the US do? On October 7, 2001 the US attacked Afghanistan, not out of self-defense but to take from the Afghan people its very lucrative financial future. The only way the Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline can be built is by invading Afghanistan and installing a government that the US government can control. A single Afghan Government that was installed by military force and kept there by military force. To distract the people of Afghanistan, the US, Canada and other NATO nations the US government came up with a plan that would falsely accuse the Taliban of being terrorists by allegedly harbouring a Saudi born and US made terrorist - bin Laden. Make no mistake, the illegal war and occupation of the sovereign state of Afghanistan will continue so long as the US remains in control of the oil and natural gas of the Caspian Region. In order to achieve that the US, Canada and NATO must commit and are committing the worst war crime of all war crimes - the genocide of the Taliban.

Friday, 27 December, 2002 the BBC reported “Central Asia pipeline deal signed”. An agreement has been signed in the Turkmen capital, Ashgabat, paving the way for construction of a gas pipeline from the Central Asian republic through Afghanistan to Pakistan. After the US illegally invaded and ousted the legal Taliban government of the sovereign state of Afghanistan the governments of the US occupied Afghanistan, Turkmenistan and Pakistan decided to push ahead with plans for the ambitious 1,500-kilometre-long gas pipeline. The leaders of the three countries have now signed a framework agreement defining the legal aspects of setting up a consortium to build and operate the pipeline. The trans-Afghanistan pipeline will begin exporting Turkmen gas via Afghanistan to Pakistani ports, from where it could reach world markets. India is the largest potential buyer and the US installed Afghan President (CIA money man during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan and drug warlord), Hamid Karzai, said Delhi was welcome to join the project.

The U.S. Army’s Law of Land Warfare (Field Manual 27-10) states:

498. Crimes Under International Law ~ Any person, whether a member of the armed forces or a civilian, who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefor and liable to punishment. Such offenses in connection with war comprise:

a. Crimes against peace.
b. Crimes against humanity.
c. War crimes.

Although this manual recognizes the criminal responsibility of individuals for those offenses which may comprise any of the foregoing types of crimes, members of the armed forces will normally be concerned, only with those offenses constituting “war crimes.”

John Lennon and Yoko Ono wanted the Vietnam War to end. “Happy Xmas (War Is Over)” was their plea to end war. This Holiday Season make this song our universal call for “Peace”

Letter from a U.S. citizen “addressed to the World” - January 16, 2007

There is a large majority of Americans who are terrified by our governments inability to hear our voices. We do not want war. Not with you, not with anyone. We admire your ancient culture and respect your religious beliefs. While our government takes steps toward instigating another illegal war, this time on your great nation, we, the majority of United States citizens, are trying everything that is in our power to prevent this.

We have recently elected new officials in Congress, which we believe and hope will stand up with us in our desires to put an end to our current administration’s designs of global occupation. However, we seem to have very little say in these matters anymore. While we may scream at the top of our lungs about how we feel, write letters to our officials, protest in the streets, demand accountability for our leaders’ actions, our president ignores us and continues his one-man circus act.

I wish to apologize to the people of Iran now, and assure you that we will do everything in our power to prevent our government leaders from another grave mistake in foreign policy.

Now, the people of Iraq hear me out.

Please understand our sorrow in what our leaders have done to your nation. While most of us believe that Saddam Hussein was a terrible dictator, we also understand that for many years, our country supported him and only deposed him as the president of Iraq when it was beneficial to our government. Our leaders lied to us about the threat of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

Most of our citizens at the time were quite fearful over what was happening in the world due to the attacks on September 11, 2001, and our president used that fear to further his personal agenda. It was WRONG. It was not our place to overthrow a dictator; it was yours if you so choose.

However, now your country is in ruins and many people die every day. Our president has just said that this is “unacceptable” to him. As usual, it seems that his words are woefully inadequate. Unacceptable is not a word to use when tens of thousands of people have died, and many more will in the time to come.

We cannot fix this mess. We can only make it worse. The majority of American people want our troops to be drawn down in your country to allow the Iraqi people a chance to help themselves. Please understand that we do not want to just abandon you. We wish to support you with our finances, our expertise in technology, our moral support, anything except more lives.

I know that you have suffered beyond anything that the US has ever suffered. But now is the time to send a message to the world that you do not need the United States to continue to occupy your sovereign nation. On behalf of most American citizens, we are eternally sorry for what we have allowed to be done to you.

To the people of the United States…

Are you afraid? I am. Not of Al-Qaeda, not of Sunni or Shia militias, not of insurgents, not of so-called “Islamofascist”, not of dirty bombs, not of having to “fight them here”, not of a nuclear Iran, not of planes blowing up, not of anthrax in the mail, not of Hamas, not of Hezbollah, not of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs), or of terrorist cells in my backyard.

I am not afraid of any of the things that our government has worked so hard to scare me into believing is at my doorstep. Instead, I am afraid of our government. Can we forget about the lies that we were told over and over again by our leaders? Can we forget about the atrocities committed in our name? Can we forget the way the rest of the world sees this great nation now? Never.

Can we stand by while legislation such as the Military Commissions Act dissolves our basic civil rights? Can we stand back and let our leaders listen to our phone calls, read our mail, investigate our library cards, or read our e-mails? I sincerely hope not.

Our president has given himself the authority to deem anyone at any place an enemy combatant. With this label, one can be arrested, detained indefinitely in Gitmo (Guantanamo Bay, Cuba) or some other military prison without charges being levied against them, and tortured.

Or, if they are lucky, they will be brought to trial.

Just not allowed to see or confront the evidence against them under the guise of national security.

It could be me for just writing this letter. It could be you for just reading it. Is this our country? Is this what the United States of America has turned into?

No more freedom of speech, lest we anger the president.

No more freedom of assembly, lest we anger the President.

No more right to a trial by a jury of our peers, no more protection against self-incrimination, unless you can withstand the torture.

We are at his mercy. We did the right thing during the November elections by taking steps to put an end to this lunacy. However, it can’t stop there. We need to take a step back, Democrat and Republican alike, to examine the horrendous damage that has been done and continues to be done, to us, and in our name.

The Revolutionary War was fought by brave people for a noble cause. This country was founded by people who refused tyranny and oppression. The majority has spoken and now action is necessary.

Stand up for what is right by putting an end to the war in Iraq, the war on the American people, and the instigation of more wars on innocent people. Are we Americans or not?

To the American troops

Please understand that you have our unwavering support. We know that you have your duty and take it very seriously. Rest assured, we will get you home. The majority of your fellow Americans are trying everything they can to end this war. Please know that our hearts break each day when we hear the news of another fallen soldier. Most of us do not support this war, BUT WE WILL ALWAYS SUPPORT YOU AND YOUR FAMILIES.

Mr President, are you listening?

I know that you do not care about my feelings, or that of any other American. Sir, I voted for you the first time. I am deeply ashamed of it and will forever have the blood of hundreds of thousands of people on my hands because of it. Almost every person in the world knows you are wrong.

Almost every American citizen knows that you are wrong.

You surround yourself with only people who agree with you, until they agree no more. Don’t you dare think that you stand for me or the vast majority of American people. You never have. We are not nearly as ignorant as you would like to believe we are.


You cannot shake hands with a clenched fist. ~Attributed to both Golda Meir and Indira Gandhi

An eye for eye only ends up making the whole world blind. ~Mahatma Gandhi

I think that people want peace so much that one of these days government had better get out of their way and let them have it. ~Dwight Eisenhower

We seek peace, knowing that peace is the climate of freedom. ~Dwight D. Eisenhower

The real differences around the world today are not between Jews and Arabs; Protestants and Catholics; Muslims, Croats, and Serbs. The real differences are between those who embrace peace and those who would destroy it; between those who look to the future and those who cling to the past; between those who open their arms and those who are determined to clench their fists. ~William J. Clinton, 1997

Peace cannot be achieved through violence, it can only be attained through understanding. ~Ralph Waldo Emerson


The British and US Government calls the Taliban “terrorists” and “extremists”, but people in Kandahar associate it with security. Before the 2001 invasion, they say, they could walk the streets safely. Now even a simple outing to the local market is seen as a risk. I think life under the Taliban was very good,” said Maria Farah, a mother of five. “If we did not have a full stomach, we could at least get some food and go to sleep, and if we went out somewhere there were no problems. How about now? If we go out, we don’t know if we will arrive home or not. If there is an explosion and the Americans are passing, they will just open fire on everyone. The security problems are too much here.”

When the Taliban implemented a ban on opium cultivation in early 2001, U.S. officials were most complimentary. The Bush administration did more than praise the Taliban’s proclaimed ban of opium cultivation. In mid-May, 2001, Secretary of State Colin Powell announced a $43 million grant to Afghanistan in addition to the humanitarian aid the United States had long been providing to agencies assisting Afghan refugees. $43 million was very serious money to Afghanistan’s theocratic masters. Both the U.S. and UN reported that the Taliban had virtually wiped out the poppy crop in 2000-2001.

The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) recently published a report revealing the latest findings on opium production in Afghanistan. Since the US invaded and now occupy Afghanistan the UN reports that “opium cultivation has exploded to unprecedented levels.” Afghanistan under US and NATO occupation has now become “the world’s biggest source of illicit drugs, surpassing the output of entire countries like Colombia (coca), Morocco (cannabis), and Myanmar (opium)—which have populations up to twenty times larger.”

Washington’s support for the Taliban government came to an especially calamitous end in September 2001 when the Bush administration falsely accused the Taliban government of being linked to bin Laden’s terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon that killed some 3,000 people. Even despite the US FBI finding no evidence to support Bush’s claim the US immediately attacked Afghanistan.

The FBI has officially declared that they have not even found any evidence to link bin Laden to the 9/11 attacks. Their official MOST WANTED poster for Usama bin Laden is missing bin Laden being wanted for the 9/11 attacks. Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI stated, “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.”

Tomb continued, “Bin Laden has not been formally charged in connection to 9/11. The FBI gathers evidence. Once evidence is gathered, it is turned over to the Department of Justice. The Department of Justice than decides whether it has enough evidence to present to a federal grand jury. In the case of the 1998 United States Embassies being bombed, Bin Laden has been formally indicted and charged by a grand jury. He has not been formally indicted and charged in connection with 9/11 because the FBI has no hard evidence connected Bin Laden to 9/11.”

The propaganda used to justify the US-led occupation in Afghanistan typically leaves out any explanation of the origins of tendencies such as Al Qaeda, the Taliban movement and other Islamist groups resisting American and NATO troops. The spin merchants of the so-called “war on terror” would have people believe that the US and its allies are fighting religious fanatics who have no support in the country and are motivated by an inexplicable and irrational hatred of Western civilisation.

On rare occasions, however, someone deviates from the script and draws attention to historical facts regarding present-day Islamic extremism that Washington and its allies prefer to leave unmentioned. One occasion was an interview on August 19 with Timemagazine with a very close American ally—Hamid Karzai, the man who was installed by the Bush administration as President of Afghanistan in 2002.

Challenged by Time to answer how an enemy could be fought that “only has annihilation as its goal”, Karzai felt compelled to note the current situation was a by-product of US support in the 1980s for the creation of an Islamic fundamentalist army to wage a jihad or holy war against a pro-Soviet regime in Afghanistan and embroil the Soviet military itself in a decade-long guerilla conflict.

Karzai told Time: “In order to fix terrorism at large, we need to remedy the wrongs of the past 30 years. Remedy means to undo. The world pushed us [Afghan jihadists] to fight the Soviets. And those who did walked away and left all the mess spread around. September 11 is a consequence of this …

“In the years of fighting against the Soviets, radicalism was the main thing. Someone like me would be called half a Muslim because we were not radical. The more radical you were the more money you were given. Radicalism became not only an ideological tool against the Soviets but a way forward economically. The more radical you presented yourself, the more money the West gave you.”

When Time protested that “it wasn’t just the West; it was Saudi Arabia, Pakistan”, who fomented Islamic extremism in Afghanistan, Karzai answered: “[T]hey were led by the West. The moderates were undermined. Afghan history and nationalism were called atheism. The more you spoke of radicalism, the better you were treated. That’s what we are paying for now.”

Karzai is intimately familiar with the US backing for Afghan jihadists in the 1980s. He ran the office of Sebghatullah Mojadeddi, the leader of one of the Mujahedin groups, and undoubtedly liaised with CIA and other US officials. His bitterness over US policy stems from the fact that the Mojadeddi faction was regarded as “moderate” as compared to the “radicals” who received the lion’s share of financial support.

From 1979 on, the US urged its allies such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan to give military and financial aid to the Islamist-based Afghan insurgents as a means of undermining the Soviet Union. Combined with direct American funds, as much as $2 billion poured in each year—the CIA’s Afghan project was by far the largest covert operation of the entire Cold War.

The largest beneficiary of US aid during the 1980s was Gulbuddin Hekmatyar’s Hezb-e-Islami, which is believed to have received as much as $600 million in US weapons and cash. Another figure the CIA worked with closely was Jalaluddin Haqqani, a guerilla commander who built a large military force in the ethnic Pashtun provinces of southern Afghanistan.

At the same time, large sums of Saudi money were used to finance the camps to which thousands of Islamic militants came from every corner of the world between 1985 and 1992. One of the main figures involved in creating what came to be called “The Base”, or Al Qaeda in Arabic, was Osama bin Laden, the son of a Saudi Arabian billionaire. While the CIA denies ever working with the foreign fighters or so-called “Afghan Arabs”, its claims are not credible. Al Qaeda was an integral part of the overall anti-Soviet jihad in which the CIA collaborated closely with Pakistani and Saudi intelligence agencies.

US support of the Taliban

The proxy war that the Islamists fought for the United States from 1979 on was a contributing factor in the economic and political crisis that gripped the Soviet Union in the 1980s and led the Stalinist regime to restore capitalist relations and ultimately, dissolve the USSR itself.

Afghanistan, however, was virtually destroyed in the process. Before the Soviet forces withdrew in 1988, their brutal counter-insurgency tactics had killed over one million Afghans, wounded as many as 1.5 million and forced five million people to flee to Pakistan.

The US continued to back the Islamists in their campaign to overthrow the weak pro-Soviet government of Mohammad Najibullah, but increasingly relied on the Pakistani military to oversee the financing and arming of the Mujahedin. Washington’s focus had shifted. The crisis of the Soviet Union had led the US ruling elite to conclude that an opportunity existed to realise their long-held ambitions to dominate the oil-rich Middle East. The Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein was provoked into invading Kuwait, creating the pretext for the deployment of more than half-a-million American troops into Saudi Arabia and, in March 1991, the first Gulf war against Iraq.

In Afghanistan, the Pakistani-backed forces of Gulbuddin Hekmatyar conducted a murderous civil war for control of the country against other Mujahedin factions, whose warlord commanders were receiving support from rival regional powers such as India, Iran and Russia. Hekmatyar troops, still well-equipped with American-supplied weapons, carried out several wholesale bombardments of the capital Kabul, in which much of it was destroyed and thousands of people killed. In June 1993, he was installed as the prime minister, supplanting a government in which Karzai had briefly served as deputy foreign minister.

The brutality of the civil war, the desperate social conditions facing the population and the plight of millions of refugees in Pakistan created the breeding ground for the Taliban—or “religious students”. Radical Islamic clerics led by Mullah Omar won support among embittered youth with promises that harsh Islamic law would suppress the criminal warlords and give a long-suffering people respite from war. Assembling a military force in the Pakistani refugee camps in 1994, the Taliban seized control of much of Afghanistan and finally took Kabul in 1996. When it first emerged, Karzai, like many Pashtuns, backed the Taliban as the means for undermining the power of their ethnic rivals.

Pakistan, which had come to view Hekmatyar as an unreliable proxy, played a crucial role in organising the Taliban’s armed forces. Units of the Pakistani military are believed to have actively fought alongside them. Another factor in the Taliban successes was the decision by Jalaluddin Haqqani in 1995 to align his large ethnic Pashtun militia with them. Haqqani served as the Minister for Borders and Tribal Affairs in the Taliban government from 1996 until the US invasion in October 2001.

The Taliban never controlled the entire country and was engaged in virtually constant warfare against the warlords who received backing from India, Russia and, to some extent, Iran. In large areas of southern Afghanistan, however, the population, while resenting the Taliban’s enforcement of harsh sharia law and bans on female education, enjoyed their first years of relative peace in over 17 years. The legacy is a degree of sympathy and even nostalgia for the Taliban, particularly when their rule is compared with the violence of the US occupation and the corruption of the drug barons and strongmen who dominate Karzai’s puppet government.


The US government and major American oil conglomerates initially welcomed the advances by the Taliban. Rich new oil and gas fields were being developed in former Soviet Central Asian republics such as Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan and the potential existed for pipelines to be constructed through Afghanistan to refineries and ports in Pakistan and India. The US attacked and now occupy Afghanistan to build this pipeline and place it under the complete control of the US. The US robbed the Taliban and the Afghan people of its financial future when they (the US) build the pipeline and control the flow of oil and natural gas through Afghanistan.

Fmr. National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski with Osama bin Laden, circa 1979.

Fmr. National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, known for his hardline policies on the Soviet Union, initiated in 1979 a campaign supporting mujaheddin (later renamed al Qaeda) in Pakistan and Afghanistan, which were run by Pakistani security services with financial support from the CIA and Britain’s MI6. This policy had the explicit aim of promoting radical Islamist and anti-Communist forces to overthrow the secular communist People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan government in Afghanistan, which had been destabilized by coup attempts against Hafizullah Amin, the power struggle within the Soviet-supported parcham faction of the PDPA and a subsequent Soviet military intervention.

Years later, in a 1997 CNN/National Security Archive interview, Brzezinski detailed the strategy taken by the Carter administration against the Soviets in 1979:

We immediately launched a twofold process when we heard that the Soviets had entered Afghanistan. The first involved direct reactions and sanctions focused on the Soviet Union, and both the State Department and the National Security Council prepared long lists of sanctions to be adopted, of steps to be taken to increase the international costs to the Soviet Union of their actions. And the second course of action led to my going to Pakistan a month or so after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, for the purpose of coordinating with the Pakistanis a joint response, the purpose of which would be to make the Soviets bleed for as much and as long as is possible; and we engaged in that effort in a collaborative sense with the Saudis, the Egyptians, the British, the Chinese, and we started providing weapons to the Mujaheddin, from various sources again—for example, some Soviet arms from the Egyptians and the Chinese. We even got Soviet arms from the Czechoslovak communist government, since it was obviously susceptible to material incentives; and at some point we started buying arms for the Mujaheddin from the Soviet army in Afghanistan, because that army was increasingly corrupt.

Milt Bearden wrote in The Main Enemy that Brzezinski, in 1980, secured an agreement from the Saudi king to match American contributions to the Afghan effort (of forming al Qaeda) dollar for dollar and that Bill Casey would keep that agreement going through the Reagan administration.

In 1998, Brzezinski was interviewed by the French newspaper Nouvel Observateur on the topic of Afghanistan. He revealed that CIA support for the mujaheddin had started before the 1979 Soviet invasion, knowingly increasing the probability of a Soviet invasion. Brzezinski saw the invasion as an opportunity to embroil the Soviet Union in a bloody conflict comparable to America’s experience in Vietnam. He referred to this as the “Afghan Trap” and viewed the end of the Soviet empire as worth the cost of strengthening militant Islamic groups.

He went on to say in that interview, “What is most important to the history of the world? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?” When the interviewer questioned him about Islamic fundamentalism representing a world menace, Brzezinski said, “Nonsense!”

In his 1997 book The Grand Chessboard, Brzezinski says that assistance to the Afghan resistance was a tactic designed to bog down the Soviet army while the United States built up a deterrent military force in the Persian Gulf to prevent Soviet political or military penetration farther south.

In the mid 1980 the US, wishing to increase its regional influence, worked with the Saudis to import an army of Saudis, Egyptians, and others into Afghanistan. The Saudis chose a member of a wealthy construction family with close royal family ties - Osama bin Laden - to lead the effort . Many of the men bin Laden recruited were connected to the Muslim Brotherhood, a regional fundamentalist group. bin Laden’s newly constructed army (shortly thereafter known as al Qaeda) successfully fought to settle Afghanistan in favor of an Afghan fundamentalist group, the Taliban. The US paid the Al Qaeda army to fight the US battles against all those who oppose the US plans for the region. With the formation of al Qaeda, with US money, the war on terror is the US war “of” terror. The US is using their own covert army to wage a fabricated threat of war against the US in order for the US government to implement US policy in the region. Public record prove that bin Laden was hand picked by Saudi Arabia and the US to form al Qaeda to orchestrate a fabricated war of terror against the US and the World.

Motive for US attacking their own country on September 11, 2001

1995 Unocal, seeking to build a pipeline across Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, and Pakistan (for delivery to energy hungry Asia via the Pakistani Arabian Sea coast), signed an agreement with Turkmenistan for natural gas purchasing rights for transport through a proposed pipeline Unocal also signed an agreement with Turkmenistan for an oil pipeline along the same route.

Aug. 13, 1996 Unocal and Delta Oil Co. of Saudi Arabia signed a memorandum of understanding with Russia’s Gazprom and Turkmenistan’s Turkmenrusgaz to build a gas pipeline from Turkmenistan to Pakistan via Afghanistan.

October 1997 Unocal and other oil companies formed Central Asia Gas Pipeline, Ltd. (CentGas) in preparation for building the trans-Afghanistan pipeline.

1997 US Congress under clinton passed a resolution declaring the Caspian and Caucasus region to be a “zone of vital American interests”.

December 1997 Unocal invited Taliban representatives to their corporate headquarters in Sugarland, TX. to discuss the pipeline project. They were thereafter invited to Washington for meetings with Clinton Administration officials.

January 1998 Unocal agreement signed between Pakistan, Turkmenistan, and the Taliban to arrange funding of the gas pipeline project, with Unocal also considering a Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-Arabian Sea coast oil pipeline.

1998 VP Dick Cheney, then CEO of the giant oil services company, Halliburton, stated: “I cannot think of a time when we have had a region emerge as suddenly to become as strategically significant as the Caspian.”

Preparing for 9/11

February 28, 1998 Unocal VP International Relations addressed US House of Representatives clearly stating that the Taliban government should be removed and replaced by a government acceptable to his company. - “The territory across which the pipeline would extend is controlled by the Taliban, an Islamic movement that is not recognized as a government by most other nations. From the outset, we have made it clear that construction of our proposed pipeline cannot begin until a recognized government is in place that has the confidence of governments, lenders and our company.” He argued that creation of a 42 inch oil pipeline across Afghanistan would yield a Western profit increase of 500% by 2015. http://www.ringnebul … ony_USHouse_1998.htm

August 7, 1998 US terrorism army in Afghanistan, al Qaeda, ordered to bomb two US embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.

August 20, 1998 Clinton ordered a 75-80 cruise missile attacks on Afghanistan and Sudan targets.

Nov. 1998 The Trade and Development Agency commissioned Enron to perform a feasibility study an east-to-west route, crossing the Caspian Mountains and terminating in Turkey along the Mediterranean. (The route was considered impractical as it would cost an estimated $1 billion more than a route through Afghanistan.)

December 1998 Unocal issued a statement that it had withdrawn from the pipeline project on 12/4/98, noting “business reasons.”

April 30, 1999 Excluding US interests, Afghanistan, Pakistan, & Turkmenistan reactivated the pipeline project.

July 4, 1999 An executive order (13129) was issued by Clinton, freezing US held Taliban assets, & prohibiting trade plus other transactions. Move was taken by Clinton because Taliban were negotiating pipeline deals directly with Pakistan and Turkmenistan without the US.

US starts using their al Qaeda army leader bin Laden as scapegoat for their planned 9/11 attacks

October 15, 1999 Under pressure from the Clinton administration UN Security Council Resolution 1267 imposed sanctions on the Taliban, demanding that the Taliban “turn over the terrorist Usama Bin Laden without further delay…”

October 12, 2000 Clinton orders attack on The USS Cole in the Yemeni port of Aden. Fear and hatred campaign is launched against US formed al Qaeda

Bush administration gearing up for September 11, 2001 attacks

January - Feb 2001 Upon “taking” office, the Bush administration immediately engaged in active negotiations with Taliban representatives with meetings in Washington, DC, Berlin, and Islamabad. During this time the Taliban government hired Laila Helms, niece of former CIA director Richard Helms, as their go-between in negotiations with the US government.

Bush (oil) administration includes:

* Dick Cheney, VP: Until 2000 - President of Halliburton (in position to build the Afghan pipeline).
* Condoleezza Rice, National Security Advisor: 1991-2000 - Manager of Chevron Oil, and Kazakhstan go-between.
* Donald Evans, Sec. Commerce: former CEO, Tom Brown, Inc. (a $1.2 billion oil company).
* Gale Norton, Sec. Interior: former national chairwoman of the Coalition of Republican Environmental Advocates - funded by, among others, BP Amoco.
* Spencer Abraham, Sec. Energy: Up through his failed bid for senatorial reelection in the 2000, he received more oil and gas industry money than all but three other senators (January 1997 through July 2000).
* Thomas White, Secretary of the Army: former Vice Chairman of Enron and a large shareholder of that company’s stock.

US attack on Afghanistan begins before 9/11

May 15, 2001 Regarding the placement of the Unocal Pipeline, a US Official delivered this ultimatum to the Taliban (via the Pakistani delegation acting as their interlocutors): “Either you accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we bury you under a carpet of bombs.”

July 2001 Niaz Naik, a former Pakistani Foreign Secretary, was told by senior American officials in mid-July that military action against Afghanistan would go ahead by the middle of October.

August 2, 2001 Last meeting with the Taliban (5 weeks before the 9/11/01 attack). Christina Rocca, in charge of Central Asian affairs for US government, met with the Taliban Ambassador to Pakistan (Abdul Salam Zaeef) in Islamabad, at which time Taliban representatives were reminded that the US had provided monetary relief assistance.

Augist 22, 2001 John O’Neill - Deputy director FBI, established national expert on the al-Qaeda network and in charge of that investigation, resigned in protest over the Bush Administration’s obstruction of those investigations. (New Yorker 1/14/02 )

August 23, 2001 John O’Neill accepts position as chief of security, World Trade Center buildings. Electronic security for the World Trade Center was provided by Securacom (now Stratesec), a company initially founded with Kuwaiti capital. Marvin P. Bush, President George W. Bush’s youngest brother served as a Securicom/Stratesec board member from 1993 through 2000.

Bush orders Air Force tanker planes painted to look like AA airlines to fly into World Center Buildings

September 11, 2001 George W Bush orders converted US Air Force fuel tanker planes to fly into World Trade Center Towers. The White House will blame their attack on their own country on US Saudi formed al Qaeda. Inadvertently declaring fifteen of the nineteen hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. John O’Neill, WTC security chief, and former deputy director of the FBI, where he headed investigation of the US link to al-Qaeda, was murdered before those buildings were demolished by explosives laid when Marvin P. Bush was head of security for the World Trade Center buildings.

October 7, 2001 Military operations with aerial bombardment began in Afghanistan targetting all those who could give evidence that the US government planned for and executed the attacks of September 11, 2001. US attacks innocent country to kill all potential witnesses- all members of their US terrorist army al Qaeda.

Jan. 29, 2002 CNN reported: “President Bush personally asked Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle Tuesday to limit the congressional investigation into the events of 9/11/01”

May 30, 2002 Afghanistan, Pakistan and Turkmenistan agreed to construct a gas pipeline to the subcontinent. US military coup replaces Taliban with Afghan Opium drug warlord Hamid Karzai who had formerly functioned as a Unocal Corporation consultant. Afghanistan pipeline now again under US control.

November 2004 The annual US Government estimate for opium poppy cultivation in Afghanistan was released: approximately 206,700 hectares of poppy were grown in 2004, representing a 239% increase in production over 2003 estimates. March 2001 both the UN and the US drug Enforcement Agency went to Afghanistan an confirmed that the Taliban government had completely wiped out the Opium drug trade as per UN aggreement for international Aid. When Bush took office there was no Opium to be found in Afghanistan but in 2004 there was now 206,700 hectares of Opium growing.

Genesis 1 - In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters. And God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. And God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night.

One of the Bible’s most basic teachings is that followers of other gods have been enticed by deceptive spirits who are utterly opposed to the God who created us and loves us. (Romans 1:18-23; 1 Corinthians 10:20; 2 Thessalonians 2:9-12; 1 Timothy 4:1) Even the first two of the ten commandments - have no other gods, make no idols - show that God regards it as a grave offense to become involved in any religion. (Exodus 20:3-4) Religion is defined as A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader. All religions are based on the religion’s congregation following the beliefs, values and practices of their spiritual leader. This is the flaw of every religion. Religions have a mortal being as their spiritual leader even though we are commanded by God to follow no other than he - the one true God. No matter how similar Christian and non-Christian religions are, their truths are laced with errors that entice their devout followers away from the one true God. We despise this biblical revelation because it forces us to make a decision - Do I choose God or do I choose religion. It sounds narrow-minded, but Jesus (not God but the son of God) affirmed that the way to God is narrow, and that few people go that way. (Matthew 7:14) Anyone really sincere, however, will seek truth no matter how unpalatable it seems.

Most religions affirm that Jesus was a great teacher or prophet. You were taught to focus on that great teacher. But by doing so, God will remain a blur. John 3:16 states “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.” Jesus was sent to us not to teach us to follow him but to be loyal followers of God. This one line of scriptures has been misinterpreted for nearly 2 thousand years. This is the main error of all religions. The actual interpretation is that whoever believes in God shall not perish, but have eternal life. All religions are based on their people believing in the messenger or prophet in lieu of (in place of; instead of) the true sovereign - God. Jesus taught us that the only way to God is not through him (Jesus) but through total unwavering devotion and dedication to God. There is no substitute for God, not even Jesus Christ.

God forbids religion - exodus 20:2-20:17

I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery; you shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and the fourth generation of those who reject me, but showing steadfast love to the thousandth generation of those who love me and keep my commandments. You shall not make wrongful use of the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not acquit anyone who misuses his name.

As a means to gain power and authority over the people of the Earth man (not God) created religion. Religion is their claim to full, supreme, and universal power over their followers. They all claim to be either sent by God (messenger of or prophet), a divine substitute of God and some even claim to be God.

Roman Catholic Church is opposed to God

The Roman Catholic Church is one such religion that falsely claims divine authority. Vicar of Christ (Latin Vicarius Christi) has been used since Pope Gelasius I (served 492 - 496), alongside a few rarer ‘vicarial’ titles, as one of the titles of the Bishop of Rome—the Pope—as head of the Universal Church (see Papal primacy). A vicar is one who represents another and acts as a steward, administering the position held in lieu of the true sovereign. In the Catechism of the Catholic Church, in addition to the pope, each bishop is referred to as the “Christ’s Vicar”(1560) to their diocese, and the conscience is called “the aboriginal Vicar of Christ.”(1778).

The Vatican officially teaches that the Pope is the substitute for Christ Jesus, who they believe to be God. The words of the official pronouncement are:

“The Pope, Bishop of Rome and Peter’s successor, ‘is the perpetual and visible source and foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company of the faithful.’

‘For the Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise.” [Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition (Washington, DC: US Catholic Conference, 1994, 1997) #882.]

[Definition: “vicar”—in the broadest sense means someone who is authorized to act as a substitute or agent for a superior / compare “vicarious”—serving in the place of someone else; assuming the position, place, or office of another person]

The Roman Catholic religion was created by Roman Emperor Constantine. He may have been a ruler of the Romans but there is no mistake - he was a mortal. Constantine was not God. He wasn’t the son of God. He claimed to have spoken to God. He claimed to be a messenger of God. Instead of embracing God he chose to create a religion devoted to Rome. For over 300 hundred years the Romans could not defeat Christ’s teachings to follow only the one true God so Constantine arrived at the conclusion that “If you can’t beat them – join them” or at least make it look like he was one of them.

Islam is opposed to God

Islam (means “to accept, surrender or submit”), the second-largest religion in the world, after Christianity is a monotheistic, Abrahamic religion originating with the teachings of the Islamic prophet Muhammad, a 7th century Arab religious and political figure. Islam means acceptance of and submission to God, and believers must demonstrate this by worshipping him, following his commands, and avoiding polytheism (Polytheism is the belief in or worship of multiple deities, such as gods and goddesses). Others describe Islam as an action of returning to God. This description is in line with the purpose of Jesus Christ and his teachings. He was sent to guide mankind back to God.

As with the Roman Catholic religion Islam was created, not by God, but by a mortal. As with the Roman Catholics they place more importance, belief, value, and devotion towards the messenger and the message than towards God. An adherent of Islam is known as a Muslim, meaning “one who submits”. Muslims believe that God revealed the Qur’an to Muhammad, who they claim to be God’s final prophet, through the angel Gabriel, and regard the Qur’an and the Sunnah (words and deeds of Muhammad a mortal) as the fundamental sources of Islam. The Qur’an states that all Muslims must believe in God, his revelations, his angels, his messengers, and in the “Day of Judgment”. They do not regard Muhammad as the founder of a new religion, but as the restorer of the original monotheistic faith of Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and other prophets. Like the Jews and Roman Catholics, Islam distorted the revelations God gave to these prophets by either altering the text, introducing a false interpretation, or both. They too are in error as they have substituted God with the messenger and a mortal’s message.

Judaism is opposed to God

Judaism is considered either the first or one of the first monotheistic religions, and is among the oldest religious traditions still being practiced today. Many of its texts and traditions are central to the other Abrahamic religions, with Jewish history and the principles and ethics of Judaism having influenced Christianity and Islam, as well as some non-Abrahamic religions. Followers of Judaism, whether converts or born into the Jewish nation (including seculars), are called Jews. The Jewish collective is regarded as an ethnoreligious group, for reasons derived from the sacred texts that define them as a nation, rather than followers of a faith. It was with the formation of Israel in 1948 that Judaism central authority is no longer vested in God, but in sacred texts, religious law and learned rabbis who interpret those texts and laws. No longer are the Jews devoted to God, they are entirely devoted to material gain and have reverted back to worshiping an idol (a cult image), another Golden calf - the State of Israel.

Jews, like the Roman Catholics and the Muslims substituted God for a mortal. They devout themselves not to their faith in God, but to mortals like the Biblical King David of Israel. In his 40 years as ruler, between approximately 1010 and 970 B.C.E., King David united the people of Israel, led them to victory in battle, conquered land and paved the way for his son, Solomon, to build the Holy Temple. Today, Jews pray daily for the coming of the “Messiah, son of David.” The Jews have substituted God for a deceased mortal being named David. The Jews pray for the coming of a descendant of this dead mortal being - son of David. They expect the Messiah to be a descendant of David - not God or the son of God. Jews no longer pray daily to God, they pray to a former king, with blood on his hands, to give them his heir to their new Kindom of Israel. The Jews have elevated David to a god like status every day by offering him prayer. Such idol worship is forbidden by God.

Whether God grants a person eternal life hinges on a single factor. That critical factor, said Jesus, is your willingness to obey God. (John 7:17) Why should God bother to open your eyes to spiritual truth and grant you eternal life if you are unwilling to respond to that truth? Yet few of us are prepared to pay that price. It involves a willingness to relinquish our hopes and dreams for the future, to forego our pet sins and anything else God may ask. Such abandonment seems crazy until we recognize who God is. The God who made and sustains the entire universe is the source of all knowledge, moral goodness and love. That means he is good, he is trustworthy, he has our best interest at heart, he is wiser than us and he loves us more than we love ourselves. Obeying God is the smartest thing anyone could ever do. Until we acknowledge this and are willing to obey, worship and devote ourselves entirely to God, and God only, we will not be granted eternal life.

written by Paul W Kincaid
Caledon East, Ontario Canada

The cheapest and cleanest fuel is all ready on tap. The technology is already here to break free of the oil depedency.

Ever wonder what it would be like to not pay the high cost of fuel? Ever wonder if there is a better, cheaper, safer and environmentally friendly fuel source? The truth is we had it all along, for millions of years. The one thing that sustains all life - plants, animals and humans - is also the source of our past, present and future energy needs. The oldest, cheapest and cleanest fuel source is water. Water covers 71% the Earth’s surface, the oceans contain 97.2% of Earth’s water. The Antarctic ice sheet, which contains 90% of all fresh water on Earth. All ready knew that. What most of you don’t tend to remember is that water is composed of two gases - Oxygen and Hydrogen. Water is known as H2O with Hydrogen content being 2 parts to 1 part Oxygen. So what? Oxygen is what we all breath, including the engines in our vehicles. Hydrogen is the most abundant of the chemical elements, constituting roughly 75% of the universe’s elemental mass. To the point, hydrogen is a flammable gas making it a viable fuel source.

You’ve heard of hydrogen fuel cells being tested in new vehicles. They have made vehicles that run on hydrogen fuel cells, or in other words on hydrogen. If they already have the technology to run our vehicles on hydrogen why haven’t we gotten away from the pollution and war causing oil? The answer is profit. Once the technology gets out and it is, the general population will have access to unlimited “free” fuel. Until they can monopolize all the water in the World they will develop new hydrogen technology at a crawl pace. Look at the oil companies today. They are the top of the Fortune 500. Record profits are being made.

Every ship that sets to sea already has access to an unlimited supply of fuel. Every ocean vessel can sail without ever stopping to refuel. No more contaminating the water when ships dump their bilge water before entering ports. Their clean burning fuel is sea water. Sea water can be split into its Oxygen and Hydrogen gases and the hydrogen can be used to power the ship’s engines. The technology is there to drastically reduce our dependency on oil today. A Canadian owned company in Ontario Canada is working on a “Water for Fuel Project” that uses sea water as the fuel source for gas generators, gas stoves, barbecues, gas furnaces and gas lamps. The same device being developed can be modified to provide hydrogen gas from sea water to power the engines of every ship that sets sail carrying cargo, grain, and tourists. This device will drastically reduce the operating costs for every ocean vessel.

With Global Warming being blamed for the rising sea water levels using sea water as fuel is another viable solution to prevent shorelines from disappearing. We can’t drink sea water so why not convert it to an energy source. By doing so we also would be reoxygenating the air we breathe. When we extract the Hydrogen (H2) from the water (H2O) we are left with Oxygen. Something we and every other living creature on Earth needs to live.


Most people that I have talked to over the years agree that the US is guilty of war crimes, crimes against peace and crimes against humanity. The majority agree that the US attacked both Afghanistan and Iraq, not out of self-defense but solely as acts of aggression. Not only does the majority believe that what the US did was and is totally wrong but the evidence unequivocally declares that what the US did was and is totally wrong. Neither Afghanistan nor Iraq attacked the US on September 11, 2001. Neither country had anything to with the attacks. The majority of people in the US, Canada, the UK and other NATO countries now believe that the US should, must leave both Afghanistan and Iraq as both wars are deemed by US, Canadian, UK and International law as illegal wars of aggressions, crimes against peace, crimes against humanity and war crimes. What the majority can’t agree on is how does one force the US to end their illegal wars? How does one bring the US leaders who commited these atrocities against mankind to justice? How can there be justice when the criminals who committed these most despicable, most heinous, most vile crimes hold the highest offices of the US government? How can each and every one bring about peace? How? The answer is simple - a peaceful protest, a consumer activism involving the act of voluntarily abstaining from using, buying, or dealing with the United States - in other words a complete boycott of the United States until the US ceases all aggressions against Afghanistan and Iraq. A complete boycott of the United States until the US immediately withdraws from both Afghanistan and Iraq. A complete boycott of the United States until the US people indict, convict and punish the people of the Bush and Obama administration for their crimes.

The Dimona nuclear reactor is the source of plutonium for Israeli nuclear weapons - nuclear reactors secretly built solely for military purposes not peaceful purposes.

Which country in the Middle East has undeclared nuclear weapons…undeclared biological and chemical weapons… and no outside inspection?

Israel’s weapons of mass destruction: how they use them and how they keep the fact of their existence from the world.

An Israeli scholar is being questioned by his country’s military authorities about a book that he wrote on Israel’s nuclear weapons program. Israel government censors refused to allow publication of Avner Cohen’s book “Israel and the Bomb.” So Mr. Cohen went to the United States where the book was published.

The book outlines the Israeli’s ultra secret development of nuclear weapons. Israel’s purpose from the very beginning was to make nuclear weapons. It now accuses Iran of secretly developing nuclear weapons. There is no proof whatsoever that Iran is developing nuclear weapons. Even if they were they should be allowed as they have not made threats of nuclear bombardment as has Israel done repeatedly for the last several years. Israel has openly threatened to nuke Iran. The west took Israel’s threat so seriously that Canada, the US and Russia held an emergency meeting to address Israel’s threat of starting a nuclear war with the nuclear bombing of Iran’s Nuclear Energy Reactors. Israel was guaranteed financial support and military support in exchange for the US, Canada and Russia to pick up where George W Bush and Dick Cheney left off - falsely accusing Iran of developing weapons of mass destruction. It is Israel that has secretly developed both nuclear and biological weapons for the sole intent of military confrontation with its neighbors. Israel is the only country making threats of using a WMD, a nuclear bomb, against its neighbors. Israel is the only country in the Middle East that is actively developing and stock piling nuclear proliferation weapons. Their nuclear program is entirely militarized. Their development of nuclear weapons of mass destruction is clearly not for peaceful purposes. Israel is the only country in the Middle East who has and is attacking its neighbors. Aggression that is deemed by the UN as war crimes.

To this day no country that makes up the UN Security Council has ever tabled sanctions against Israel for their secret development of nuclear and biological weapons. To this day no country, not the US, not Canada, not Russia, not England, has taken any action to stop Israel’s aggression against its neighbors. No country has called for any action against Israel for secretly developing nuclear and biological weapons in violation of international treaties and laws. For Israel’s openly threatening a nuclear bombing of another country.

Israel has repeatedly stated that they have the right to nuke Iran. They do not have any such right. No country has any right to use any nuclear or biological weapons against any other country. Even the US didn’t have the right to drop 2 nuclear bombs on 2 civilian cities. The US secretly developed the bomb and the US is the only country in the World to actually use nuclear weapons against another country yet today a country that doesn’t have the bomb is being accused of apparent crimes against humanity. A country that doesn’t have the bomb is being attacked by countries that actually have the bomb and have used them and have threatened to use them against the World.

The Cold War Era was about the US and the Soviet Union threat of using its nuclear arsenal against each other to get what it wanted. For 60 years they threatened the destroy the World with a Nuclear Armageddon. Logically the threat is from those who have and from those who have used. There is no threat, it’s all hearsay, all false accusations. There is no threat from Iran, the threat is from Israel. The threat is from the US.

Have we not learned a lesson already. The US is making the same accusations against Iran as they did with Iraq. It is now public knowledge that George W Bush falsely accused Iraq of seeking to develop weapons of mass destruction. He committed perjury when he addressed the US Congress and the United Nations about the threat from Iraq, a threat that never existed. The US Congress declaration of war against Iraq was based on the false accusations of George W bush, Dick Cheney, Collen Powell and other Bush administration officials. They falsely accused Iraq of pursuing and developing WMDs, WMDs that have never been found. Need I remind you that Iraq did not attack the US on September 11, 2001. Neither did Afghanistan. There is however evidence that Saudi Arabia and the Israeli Mossad were involved in the 9/11 attacks yet neither countries have ever been brought to justice or attacked by the US for their crimes against the US. bin Laden and the majority of named hijackers were all Saudi Nationals. The Israeli Mossad filmed the air planes that flew into the World Trade Centers. The Israeli Mossad knew the attacks were coming and they were the only ones who have captured the attacks on video. If Israel was the good friends of the US then they would have warned the US instead of filming and applauding the attacks.

The book “Israel and the Bomb” states that in late 1960, the US government came to realize that Israel was constructing in Dimona a large scale nuclear reactor. The uncovering of that Israeli state secret led to various Israeli announcements that Israel had no intention of building Nuclear WMDs. On the 21st of December, 3 days after a New York Times front page story about Israel’s Reactor in Dimona, David Ben Gurion made what is still the only Prime Ministerial speech in the Knesset (Israel’s parliament) about its Nuclear Policies, stating that the Reactor is meant for peaceful uses only.

The Eisenhower administration seemed initially unwilling to pressure Israel about its nuclear facilities, but following the exposure it did demand answers about Israel’s plans. In a meeting with US Ambassador Ogden R Reid, David Ben Gurion stated that the Plutonium from the reactor will be returned to the manufacturing country, that Israel will allow visits of scientists from friendly countries in the reactor, but not international inspections, and that Israel did not plan to construct a third nuclear reactor. He also denied any intentions to construct a nuclear bomb (pp. 130-133).

When John F. Kennedy became the 35th president of the United States, US policy became hostile to Nuclear Proliferation, and Kennedy started a drive that ended in the 1968 Non Proliferation Treaty. Therefore, his policies towards Israel were meant to assure that Israel was not constructing Nuclear weapons. Since Israel was doing just that, the clashes were all but inevitable.

US Scientists started to inspect (the US’s term; Israel preferred “visit”) Dimona in 1961. Despite the US demand for 2 such visits per year, Israel’s duck-and-weave policy never allowed more then one single day visit per year.

The US continued to pressure Israel, especially towards the end of Kennedy’s administration. In April of 1963, Kennedy arranged an unplanned meeting with Shimon Peres, the architect of Israel’s reactor in Dimona and then the deputy minister for defense, in which Peres first articulated (apparently spontaneously) Israel’s formula about Nuclear weapons “Israel will not be the first country to introduce nuclear weapons to the middle east” (p. 159). Towards the end of Ben Gurion’s prime ministry, and Kennedy’s presidency, the ground rules for the “ambiguity” policy of Israel were set: Israel stated that it had no intentions to construct nuclear weapons, and it allowed US visitors, albeit in a lesser frequency then the US desired. Ben Gurion’s resignation and the assassination of Kennedy meant that their predecessors would have to continue, and refine, “ambiguity” as Israel’s policy and US’s response.

The main change in subsequent US-Israeli relationship was Israel’s increased interest in purchasing conventional weapons from the US. Strangely, Israel and the US switched roles in these two dialogues. Regarding Nuclear weapons, the US kept pressuring Israel to allow more inspections, and to authorize the US to share its belief in Israel’s peaceful intentions, while Israel evaded. In the weapons front, Israel kept asking to buy weapons, while the US tried to evade and delay. Neither side wanted to connect the subjects, because Israel was anxious not to disclose its intentions, while the US feared that pressuring Israel by withholding conventional weaponry would only further commit it to the nuclear option (p. 272). Unlike the Kennedy administration, Lyndon Johnson seems to have been willing to accept Israel’s nuclear plans, as long as they were not public. Thus “ambiguity” started to give over to “opacity” (p. 276).

Chiefly, “Opacity” meant the acknowledgement of Israel as a de-facto Nuclear power, provided that Israel made few outspoken references to its nuclear capacities. Late in the Johnson administration, the President was unwilling to tie the sale of Phantom jets to Israel to Israel’s signing the Non-Proliferation Treatment. Israel’s then ambassador to the US, Yitzhak Rabin, defined Israel agreement not to “introduce” nuclear weapons to the Middle East as an agreement not to test it (p. 409). By then Israel clearly possessed nuclear weapons. Under Nixon, the US effectively gave up contesting that definition, and gave up the increasingly embarrassing inspections of the Dimona reactor. On the 18th of July, 1970, the New York Times announced that Israel was a nuclear power, and although both Israel’s official spokespersons and the State Department denounced the article as “speculative” and “inaccurate”, neither denied it (p. 434).

Avner Cohen’s book tells the story of the creation of the Israeli bomb, and the relations between Israel and the US is just one part of this story. Yet it was the Israeli-American relationship that above all defined Israel’s continued policy of Opacity, still intact almost 35 years after that New York Times news story. In the afterwards, Cohen calls for a reconsideration of Israel’s nuclear policy, and is encouraged by the new openness of public discourse about it. Yet even if Israel’s policy was chiefly designed in response to US pressure, the bomb was build because of the Arab-Israeli conflict. In that conflict, it often seems that the more things change, the more they stay the same.