Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Quotes Supporting Situational Ethics from the Birth Control Review
view quotes full screen
From http://web.archive.org/web/20010430063118/www.hli.org/issues/pp/bcreview/bcr15.html
Quotes Supporting Situational Ethics from the Birth Control Review
1917
"... one is forced to admit that our whole attitude towards sex is on an unwholesome and unsound basis. Fundamental psychic changes must obtain, a cleaner, more natural attitude must take the place of the primitive convention-veneered instincts ) in short, we must create a new morality ... we need a new morality."
Lillian Browne-Olf. "A Psychological Aspect of Birth Control." Birth Control Review, Volume I, Numbers 4 and 5 (April-May 1917), page 12.
1920
"To those who unconsciously hold to the idea of an unchanging and unchangeable code of morality, we might mention that moral standards are evolutionary, and change from time to time, and often completely reverse themselves from epoch to epoch."
William J. Fielding. "The Morality of Birth Control." Birth Control Review Volume IV, Number 11 (November 1920), page 13.
1924
"One reason for the difficulty I suggested in the quotation from William Blake with which she heads the article: `and priests in black gowns were walking their rounds and binding with briars my joys and desires ...'
"In the first place, let us recognize that in the ordinary acceptance of the term, morality is nothing but the net residuum, of social habits, the codification of customs. Decent conservative and altogether respectable cannibals find nothing immoral in anthropology. The only `immoral' person, in any country is he who fails to observe the current folkways."
"`Today the chief warfare against Birth Control is waged by the Roman Catholic clergy and their allies ... the church has occupied itself with the problem of imposing abstinence upon its priesthood ... it is not surprising that such a class of professional celibates should be physically sensitive to the implications of the idea of contraception. Taught to look upon all expressions of physical love as sinful, it is but natural that these men should combat a school of thought so diametrically opposed to their own ... The philosophy of Birth Control insists upon the maximum of personal liberty in every sphere of human behavior that is compatible with the maximum of personal responsibility. Rightly or wrongly, it throws back upon the individual full responsibility for his behavior. It requires him to act upon the basis of reason, experience and prudence. True morality, we claim, is the outgrowth of experience and of the exercise of rational intelligence upon that experience.
"`The Catholic scheme of ethics, on the contrary, demands strict obedience to the laws and prohibitions that have been codified by authority. That authority declares in no uncertain terms that all positive methods of this nature (contraception) are immoral and forbidden.'"
Margaret Sanger. "The Fight Against Birth Control." Birth Control Review, Volume VIII, Number 9 (September 1924), pages 245 to 248.
1925
"Sexual expression is one of the most profoundly spiritual of all the avenues of human experience, and Birth Control the supreme moral instrument by which, without injury to others nor to the future destinies of mankind on this earth, each individual is enabled to progress on the road of self development and self realization ...
"The application of the State Board of Charities for increased appropriation for the South Dakota School and Home for the Feeble-minded shows to what extent our present methods are meeting the problem of the breeding of the unfit."
"Editorials." Birth Control Review, Volume IX, Number 8 (August 1925), pages 243 and 244.
"This mirage of relief for their miseries ) this program based on emotional starvation ) is all the greatest of the Christian Churches has to offer its children as the alternative for Birth Control. The self control which would limit a marriage to a reasonable family of, say, three children means that many years of married life must be passed in absolute celibacy.
"This church, of any institution in the world, ought to know that such self control is a mirage. For more than fifteen hundred years the Roman Catholic Church has been trying to enforce celibacy not upon the rank and file, but upon a picked body of the holiest men in its membership."
"Editorials." Birth Control Review, Volume IX, Number 10 (October 1925), page 276.
1926
"Sexual expression is one of the most profoundly spiritual of all the avenues of human existence, and Birth Control the supreme moral instrument by which, without injury to others, nor to the future destinies of mankind on this earth, each individual is enabled to progress on the road of self-development and self-realization."
Margaret Sanger, quoted in the Birth Control Review, Volume XI, Number 1 (April 1927), page 121.
1928
"What does the World League for Sexual Reform aim at?
"It aims at being the headquarters of a campaign against a false sexual morality, a false morality, to which already endless numbers of human beings have been sacrificed, and which continues daily to demand its victims.
"In this fight we mean to use exclusively those mental weapons and those facts, which sexual science (in the widest sense) gives us.
"What is out of accord with the laws of nature and science can never be ethically right or truly moral. Where opposition exists between the forces of nature and of society (as, for example, in the population question) one must be at pains to do away with this opposition by using the conscious will of mankind to bring these forces into harmonious cooperation.
"We are unable to recognize as binding the varying rules prescribed at different times by the moment. We can recognize only what is in agreement with the teachings of life and love.
"The following ten points deserve special consideration:
1. Marriage reform. Wedlock must be raised to the position of a living comradeship between two people. This necessitates a reform in the marriage contract, conjugal rights and divorce.
2. The position of women as members of society. Women have not by any means everywhere as yet won the equal rights that are their due in political, economic, social and sexual spheres.
3. Birth Control i.e. greater sense of responsibility in the begetting of children. We believe in making harmless contraceptives known, combat on the other hand both abortion and the penalizing of abortion.
4. Eugenics in the sense of Nietzsche's words: "You shall not merely continue the race, but move it upward!"
5. A fair judgment of those who are unsuited to marriage, above all the intermediate sexual types.
6. Tolerance of free sexual relations, especially protection of the unmarried mother and the child born out of wedlock.
7. The prevention of prostitution and venereal disease.
8. The conception of aberrations of sexual desire not as criminal, sinful or vicious but as a more or less pathological phenomenon.
9. The setting up of a code of sexual law, which does not interfere with the mutual sexual will of grown-up persons.
10. The question of sexual education and enlightenment.
"All these points have in the last fifty years been the subject of lively discussions, which have not only often fundamentally altered the whole conception, but also the whole organization of sexual life. We can in this sense speak of a sexual crisis. The old morality with its terrible sexual misery still has the upper hand, and the human prejudices and condemnation are still heaped higher."
"News Notes." Birth Control Review, Volume XII, Number 7 (July 1928), page 215.
1930
"Law in the first instance is merely the crystallization of custom. And custom is no more than what most of us are in the habit of doing most of the time."
Dorothy Kenyon. "Nullification or Repeal?" Birth Control Review, Volume XIV, Number 10 (October 1930), page 278.
"In the ideal community human life will be sacred, inviolate and of the highest value ... But such a community cannot develop unless we learn to eliminate the weak and incapable, in the simplest and most painless way."
"Dr. Helene Stocker Writes" (from the German daily Der Wiener Tag of September 18, 1930). Birth Control Review, Volume XIV, Number 11 (November 1930), page 322.
"Humanism does not believe in the supernatural. Its supreme aim is the understanding and development of human personality, progressing toward an ideal society of ideal persons. It is not the worship or love of God. The faith of Humanism is not in a supernatural God, but in the supreme value and perfectibility of human personality. It does not seek a justification for life in another life beyond death, but bends its energies toward making life on earth as deep and full as possible. "Instead of the fear of God as a means of social control, man prefers the good-will of man ... For a mystic sense of union with the divine, the Humanist substitutes a genuine reverence for and appreciation of truth, beauty and goodness, as found in nature, including human nature."
It is worthy of special note that the second item of Mr. Potter's social program of Humanism is the "legalizing of Birth Control.""
Review of Charles Francis Potter's book Humanism: A New Religion, by Eric L. Alling, M.D. Birth Control Review, Volume XIV, Number 11 (November 1930), page 327.
1931
"The importance of this encyclical [Casti Connubii] lies in the fact that the head of the most powerful division of Christianity announces the refusal of that Church to recognize as moral an accepted practice in modern marital relations. When a majority of intelligent, honest citizens deliberately accepts a practice it thereby becomes moral, whatever any religious leader may say to the contrary. Contraception is here to stay, and if the Catholic Church refuses to sanction it, so much the worse for that Church."
Reverend Charles Francis Potter, Founder of the Humanist Society. "Comments on the Pope's Encyclical." Birth Control Review, Volume XV, Number 2 (February 1931), page 40.
"I think the whole Christian world will thank him [Pope Pius XI] for his explicit declaration that abortion, in so far as this is used to enable people to escape responsibility, is murder. I do not believe anybody questions this, but it is well to have it stated.
"But when he comes to the matter of birth control, I cannot go with him. So far as I can see the Church has nothing to do with this. It is a matter for medical science to determine whether it is against nature. If it is, science itself will forbid it. If it is not, then it is a matter for the individual."
Right Reverend Arthur S. Lloyd, Suffragan Bishop of the Diocese of New York (Protestant Episcopal Church). "Comments on the Pope's Encyclical." Birth Control Review, Volume XV, Number 2 (February 1931), page 41.
"The churches too often are dragged unwillingly by the ears into the schools of modern thinking. There is want of red blood in their consent to that which they can no longer refuse.
"Moral teachers of many sorts have made too much of the art of saying "no." It is important enough; but the art of saying "yes," and of saying it so that everybody understands it, is far greater and far more needed. Religionists have more to fear from their own timidities than from any aggressiveness which wickedness has ever shown."
Robert Whitaker. "Yea-Saying." Birth Control Review, Volume XV, Number 3 (March 1931), pages 83 and 84.
"Birth control will help to eliminate disease, promote the welfare of the individual, of the family and society. Continence may be the ideal as the Catholic Church points out, but we may leave it for the time when we become angels."
Matheus P. de Freitas of Santa Cruz, Flores, the Azores. Letter to the Birth Control Review, Volume XV, Number 4 (April 1931), page 126.
"Opponents of birth control frequently shoot their cuffs and snort that "self control" is the proper alternative for married people who do not, for one reason or another, desire children. This theory sounds good, but it wrecks itself upon the shoals of human nature. There is little reason to believe that continence in married people is either desirable or possible, except for a few ascetics and eccentrics who refuse to recognize the biological urge as the basis of love and marriage. The churchmen who have indorsed birth control have taken a sane view of the matter and exhibited a sound understanding of the trend of public thought."
Editorial from the Columbus, Ohio Dispatch of March 23, 1931. "Comments ..... and Comments On the Report of The Federal Council of Churches of Christ in America." Birth Control Review, Volume XV, Number 5 (May 1931), page 142.
"Childless couples (when fertile and sound) are a menace to civilization, their early supreme selfishness acts to destroy the ends they had anticipated, and they finally become dissatisfied and anti-social ... The illegality, under present disgraceful laws, of the dissemination of proper contraceptive information to those who need it, makes it incumbent on each individual couple to repudiate unjustifiable laws, which are no doubt also unconstitutional, and seek comfort, health and efficiency for themselves, to choose between poverty and handicap on the one hand and proper food and sufficient early training on the other, for their children."
Walter F. Robie, M.D. "The Ethics of Parenthood." Birth Control Review, Volume XV, Number 5 (May 1931), page 158.
"I find myself in complete agreement with Havelock Ellis in his article on Marriage ) An Enduring Institution. I believe that monogamy is the ideal to which society should approximate. There should be nothing compulsory about it. Marriage should be made harder and divorce easier. Plenty of sex education and probably sane and decent sex experience should precede permanent marriage. The new sexology, far from destroying marriage and the family, is the only thing which can make possible a happy and enduring marriage for the majority of mankind. Most marital discord is due to absence of sex knowledge and to sexual maladjustment, both of which would be eliminated if we were civilized enough to disseminate scientific knowledge on sex matters and to permit pre-conjugal sex experience.
"... Obviously, the bonds of theological and legal intimidation are bursting. The new family order must rest upon intelligence, freedom, and adequate information."
Harry Elmer Barnes. "Comments on Ellis' Article: Freedom and Knowledge Needed." Birth Control Review, Volume XV, Number 7 (July 1931), page 210.
"But so great has become the mass production of laws in the last few years, that people are now beginning to reflect that a law that is not or cannot be enforced is a stench in the nostrils of human progress. Thinking people in constantly increasing numbers believe that there is all the difference in the world between evils that are essentially and by common consent deleterious to human society ) such as murder, rape, robbery and the like ) and actions that are declared wrong by legislation, about which there may be a division of opinion. The old common law used to describe this difference as mala in se and mala prohibita. People are becoming more and more convinced that no law can be enforced or should exist that does not have behind it a practically united public sentiment, and are setting off against our traditional law-mindedness a steadily increasing emphasis on personal liberty.
"The old cry that a law is a law, and just for that reason must be blindly obeyed, has no place in the modern forward-looking, liberty-loving humanitarianism of present day life.
"The opposition in the present instance is confined, practically, to a single very powerful and magnificently disciplined church, but it is a very real opposition, and one that the eagle-eyed politician will always respect. Until that church can be persuaded to change its view ) and there, in my judgment, should be the focal point of attack ) all attempts to change this spuriously termed "moral" law will prove abortive."
George Packard. "Is Birth Control Legal?" Birth Control Review, Volume XV, Number 9 (September 1931), pages 248 to 250.
"... It is the opportunity to hold up before our youth the ideals of a Christian home. What will those ideals be? We will have to discover them; we do not fully know them yet. But at least we may be sure a Christian home will not be a home in which sex is thought to be naturally a filthy thing. It will not be a place where shame goes hand in hand with physical love. It will not be a place where the mother must bear child after child, some of them unfit to live, until her own health is forfeit. Rather it will be a place where children are wanted and where they are eagerly sought when health and finances permit. At other times it will be a place where physical love need not be burdened with the worry of unwanted pregnancies. Surely a Christian home ought to be at least this."
The Survey Graphic, August 1931, quoted in "In the Magazines: The Churches and the Stork." Birth Control Review, Volume XV, Number 9 (September 1931), pages 268 and 269.
1935
"Whatever else religion may teach today, it teaches that human progress is dependent on human initiative and human direction. Religion today regards man as able rationally and scientifically to control himself, his world, the world of energy, and the world of values for the satisfaction of human desires; and in proper proportions it glorifies these desires ...
"In accordance with this trend, the attitude of the church toward the whole problem of sex is changing. Religion is becoming actively interested in the erotic life where for ages the grossest ignorance and credulity, superstition and tyranny have held sway. In the place now occupied by such ignorance and credulity, such superstition and tyranny, the Church today will help you install knowledge and enlightened virtue.
"Too often in the past sex life has been thought of as largely an evil to be tolerated for the purpose of propagation. But as the church came to terms with science in other fields, it slowly capitulated in the field of sex. Here the church is no longer willing for nature to be uncontrolled by intelligence and scientific techniques. In recent years the following church organizations have gone on record in support of birth control:
Committee on Marriage and the Home of the Federal Council of the Churches of Christ inAmerica
Lambeth Conference of Bishops of the Church of England
General Council of Congregational and Christian Churches
Universalist General Convention
The American Unitarian Association
Central Conference of American Rabbis
New York East Conference and other regional sections of the Methodist Episcopal Church
Special Committee of the Women's Problems Group of the Philadelphia Yearly Meeting ofFriends
The 1934 Convention of the Y.W.C.A.
"The Rhythm method now making such rapid headway among Catholics, while not a satisfactory method of birth control, is nevertheless a distinct move in the direction of a modern attitude on the matter; for if sex life is ethical apart from propagation, then insistence on natural as distinguished from other scientific methods is an untenable position and will undoubtedly be abandoned in favor of techniques that offer greater safety than can the "safe period."
"The major cultural, ethical and religious significance of birth control is that it puts the realm of sex on the side of intelligence, control and human satisfactions. The basic importance of birth control is not primarily in its emphasis on the small family system ... but in its principle of intelligent control of life processes ... And perhaps most important of all, the mind of the public must be so educated that sex and all that pertains thereto can be thought and spoken of with the frankness that now prevails in the fields of dietetics and esthetics, or of ethics and religion."
Rev. Curtis W. Reese, Dean of the Abraham Lincoln Center, in a speech on the church and birth control. Birth Control Review, Volume II, Number 5 (New Series, February 1935), pages 2 and 3.
From http://web.archive.org/web/20010430063118/www.hli.org/issues/pp/bcreview/bcr15.html
Quotes Supporting Situational Ethics from the Birth Control Review
1917
"... one is forced to admit that our whole attitude towards sex is on an unwholesome and unsound basis. Fundamental psychic changes must obtain, a cleaner, more natural attitude must take the place of the primitive convention-veneered instincts ) in short, we must create a new morality ... we need a new morality."
Lillian Browne-Olf. "A Psychological Aspect of Birth Control." Birth Control Review, Volume I, Numbers 4 and 5 (April-May 1917), page 12.
1920
"To those who unconsciously hold to the idea of an unchanging and unchangeable code of morality, we might mention that moral standards are evolutionary, and change from time to time, and often completely reverse themselves from epoch to epoch."
William J. Fielding. "The Morality of Birth Control." Birth Control Review Volume IV, Number 11 (November 1920), page 13.
1924
"One reason for the difficulty I suggested in the quotation from William Blake with which she heads the article: `and priests in black gowns were walking their rounds and binding with briars my joys and desires ...'
"In the first place, let us recognize that in the ordinary acceptance of the term, morality is nothing but the net residuum, of social habits, the codification of customs. Decent conservative and altogether respectable cannibals find nothing immoral in anthropology. The only `immoral' person, in any country is he who fails to observe the current folkways."
"`Today the chief warfare against Birth Control is waged by the Roman Catholic clergy and their allies ... the church has occupied itself with the problem of imposing abstinence upon its priesthood ... it is not surprising that such a class of professional celibates should be physically sensitive to the implications of the idea of contraception. Taught to look upon all expressions of physical love as sinful, it is but natural that these men should combat a school of thought so diametrically opposed to their own ... The philosophy of Birth Control insists upon the maximum of personal liberty in every sphere of human behavior that is compatible with the maximum of personal responsibility. Rightly or wrongly, it throws back upon the individual full responsibility for his behavior. It requires him to act upon the basis of reason, experience and prudence. True morality, we claim, is the outgrowth of experience and of the exercise of rational intelligence upon that experience.
"`The Catholic scheme of ethics, on the contrary, demands strict obedience to the laws and prohibitions that have been codified by authority. That authority declares in no uncertain terms that all positive methods of this nature (contraception) are immoral and forbidden.'"
Margaret Sanger. "The Fight Against Birth Control." Birth Control Review, Volume VIII, Number 9 (September 1924), pages 245 to 248.
1925
"Sexual expression is one of the most profoundly spiritual of all the avenues of human experience, and Birth Control the supreme moral instrument by which, without injury to others nor to the future destinies of mankind on this earth, each individual is enabled to progress on the road of self development and self realization ...
"The application of the State Board of Charities for increased appropriation for the South Dakota School and Home for the Feeble-minded shows to what extent our present methods are meeting the problem of the breeding of the unfit."
"Editorials." Birth Control Review, Volume IX, Number 8 (August 1925), pages 243 and 244.
"This mirage of relief for their miseries ) this program based on emotional starvation ) is all the greatest of the Christian Churches has to offer its children as the alternative for Birth Control. The self control which would limit a marriage to a reasonable family of, say, three children means that many years of married life must be passed in absolute celibacy.
"This church, of any institution in the world, ought to know that such self control is a mirage. For more than fifteen hundred years the Roman Catholic Church has been trying to enforce celibacy not upon the rank and file, but upon a picked body of the holiest men in its membership."
"Editorials." Birth Control Review, Volume IX, Number 10 (October 1925), page 276.
1926
"Sexual expression is one of the most profoundly spiritual of all the avenues of human existence, and Birth Control the supreme moral instrument by which, without injury to others, nor to the future destinies of mankind on this earth, each individual is enabled to progress on the road of self-development and self-realization."
Margaret Sanger, quoted in the Birth Control Review, Volume XI, Number 1 (April 1927), page 121.
1928
"What does the World League for Sexual Reform aim at?
"It aims at being the headquarters of a campaign against a false sexual morality, a false morality, to which already endless numbers of human beings have been sacrificed, and which continues daily to demand its victims.
"In this fight we mean to use exclusively those mental weapons and those facts, which sexual science (in the widest sense) gives us.
"What is out of accord with the laws of nature and science can never be ethically right or truly moral. Where opposition exists between the forces of nature and of society (as, for example, in the population question) one must be at pains to do away with this opposition by using the conscious will of mankind to bring these forces into harmonious cooperation.
"We are unable to recognize as binding the varying rules prescribed at different times by the moment. We can recognize only what is in agreement with the teachings of life and love.
"The following ten points deserve special consideration:
1. Marriage reform. Wedlock must be raised to the position of a living comradeship between two people. This necessitates a reform in the marriage contract, conjugal rights and divorce.
2. The position of women as members of society. Women have not by any means everywhere as yet won the equal rights that are their due in political, economic, social and sexual spheres.
3. Birth Control i.e. greater sense of responsibility in the begetting of children. We believe in making harmless contraceptives known, combat on the other hand both abortion and the penalizing of abortion.
4. Eugenics in the sense of Nietzsche's words: "You shall not merely continue the race, but move it upward!"
5. A fair judgment of those who are unsuited to marriage, above all the intermediate sexual types.
6. Tolerance of free sexual relations, especially protection of the unmarried mother and the child born out of wedlock.
7. The prevention of prostitution and venereal disease.
8. The conception of aberrations of sexual desire not as criminal, sinful or vicious but as a more or less pathological phenomenon.
9. The setting up of a code of sexual law, which does not interfere with the mutual sexual will of grown-up persons.
10. The question of sexual education and enlightenment.
"All these points have in the last fifty years been the subject of lively discussions, which have not only often fundamentally altered the whole conception, but also the whole organization of sexual life. We can in this sense speak of a sexual crisis. The old morality with its terrible sexual misery still has the upper hand, and the human prejudices and condemnation are still heaped higher."
"News Notes." Birth Control Review, Volume XII, Number 7 (July 1928), page 215.
1930
"Law in the first instance is merely the crystallization of custom. And custom is no more than what most of us are in the habit of doing most of the time."
Dorothy Kenyon. "Nullification or Repeal?" Birth Control Review, Volume XIV, Number 10 (October 1930), page 278.
"In the ideal community human life will be sacred, inviolate and of the highest value ... But such a community cannot develop unless we learn to eliminate the weak and incapable, in the simplest and most painless way."
"Dr. Helene Stocker Writes" (from the German daily Der Wiener Tag of September 18, 1930). Birth Control Review, Volume XIV, Number 11 (November 1930), page 322.
"Humanism does not believe in the supernatural. Its supreme aim is the understanding and development of human personality, progressing toward an ideal society of ideal persons. It is not the worship or love of God. The faith of Humanism is not in a supernatural God, but in the supreme value and perfectibility of human personality. It does not seek a justification for life in another life beyond death, but bends its energies toward making life on earth as deep and full as possible. "Instead of the fear of God as a means of social control, man prefers the good-will of man ... For a mystic sense of union with the divine, the Humanist substitutes a genuine reverence for and appreciation of truth, beauty and goodness, as found in nature, including human nature."
It is worthy of special note that the second item of Mr. Potter's social program of Humanism is the "legalizing of Birth Control.""
Review of Charles Francis Potter's book Humanism: A New Religion, by Eric L. Alling, M.D. Birth Control Review, Volume XIV, Number 11 (November 1930), page 327.
1931
"The importance of this encyclical [Casti Connubii] lies in the fact that the head of the most powerful division of Christianity announces the refusal of that Church to recognize as moral an accepted practice in modern marital relations. When a majority of intelligent, honest citizens deliberately accepts a practice it thereby becomes moral, whatever any religious leader may say to the contrary. Contraception is here to stay, and if the Catholic Church refuses to sanction it, so much the worse for that Church."
Reverend Charles Francis Potter, Founder of the Humanist Society. "Comments on the Pope's Encyclical." Birth Control Review, Volume XV, Number 2 (February 1931), page 40.
"I think the whole Christian world will thank him [Pope Pius XI] for his explicit declaration that abortion, in so far as this is used to enable people to escape responsibility, is murder. I do not believe anybody questions this, but it is well to have it stated.
"But when he comes to the matter of birth control, I cannot go with him. So far as I can see the Church has nothing to do with this. It is a matter for medical science to determine whether it is against nature. If it is, science itself will forbid it. If it is not, then it is a matter for the individual."
Right Reverend Arthur S. Lloyd, Suffragan Bishop of the Diocese of New York (Protestant Episcopal Church). "Comments on the Pope's Encyclical." Birth Control Review, Volume XV, Number 2 (February 1931), page 41.
"The churches too often are dragged unwillingly by the ears into the schools of modern thinking. There is want of red blood in their consent to that which they can no longer refuse.
"Moral teachers of many sorts have made too much of the art of saying "no." It is important enough; but the art of saying "yes," and of saying it so that everybody understands it, is far greater and far more needed. Religionists have more to fear from their own timidities than from any aggressiveness which wickedness has ever shown."
Robert Whitaker. "Yea-Saying." Birth Control Review, Volume XV, Number 3 (March 1931), pages 83 and 84.
"Birth control will help to eliminate disease, promote the welfare of the individual, of the family and society. Continence may be the ideal as the Catholic Church points out, but we may leave it for the time when we become angels."
Matheus P. de Freitas of Santa Cruz, Flores, the Azores. Letter to the Birth Control Review, Volume XV, Number 4 (April 1931), page 126.
"Opponents of birth control frequently shoot their cuffs and snort that "self control" is the proper alternative for married people who do not, for one reason or another, desire children. This theory sounds good, but it wrecks itself upon the shoals of human nature. There is little reason to believe that continence in married people is either desirable or possible, except for a few ascetics and eccentrics who refuse to recognize the biological urge as the basis of love and marriage. The churchmen who have indorsed birth control have taken a sane view of the matter and exhibited a sound understanding of the trend of public thought."
Editorial from the Columbus, Ohio Dispatch of March 23, 1931. "Comments ..... and Comments On the Report of The Federal Council of Churches of Christ in America." Birth Control Review, Volume XV, Number 5 (May 1931), page 142.
"Childless couples (when fertile and sound) are a menace to civilization, their early supreme selfishness acts to destroy the ends they had anticipated, and they finally become dissatisfied and anti-social ... The illegality, under present disgraceful laws, of the dissemination of proper contraceptive information to those who need it, makes it incumbent on each individual couple to repudiate unjustifiable laws, which are no doubt also unconstitutional, and seek comfort, health and efficiency for themselves, to choose between poverty and handicap on the one hand and proper food and sufficient early training on the other, for their children."
Walter F. Robie, M.D. "The Ethics of Parenthood." Birth Control Review, Volume XV, Number 5 (May 1931), page 158.
"I find myself in complete agreement with Havelock Ellis in his article on Marriage ) An Enduring Institution. I believe that monogamy is the ideal to which society should approximate. There should be nothing compulsory about it. Marriage should be made harder and divorce easier. Plenty of sex education and probably sane and decent sex experience should precede permanent marriage. The new sexology, far from destroying marriage and the family, is the only thing which can make possible a happy and enduring marriage for the majority of mankind. Most marital discord is due to absence of sex knowledge and to sexual maladjustment, both of which would be eliminated if we were civilized enough to disseminate scientific knowledge on sex matters and to permit pre-conjugal sex experience.
"... Obviously, the bonds of theological and legal intimidation are bursting. The new family order must rest upon intelligence, freedom, and adequate information."
Harry Elmer Barnes. "Comments on Ellis' Article: Freedom and Knowledge Needed." Birth Control Review, Volume XV, Number 7 (July 1931), page 210.
"But so great has become the mass production of laws in the last few years, that people are now beginning to reflect that a law that is not or cannot be enforced is a stench in the nostrils of human progress. Thinking people in constantly increasing numbers believe that there is all the difference in the world between evils that are essentially and by common consent deleterious to human society ) such as murder, rape, robbery and the like ) and actions that are declared wrong by legislation, about which there may be a division of opinion. The old common law used to describe this difference as mala in se and mala prohibita. People are becoming more and more convinced that no law can be enforced or should exist that does not have behind it a practically united public sentiment, and are setting off against our traditional law-mindedness a steadily increasing emphasis on personal liberty.
"The old cry that a law is a law, and just for that reason must be blindly obeyed, has no place in the modern forward-looking, liberty-loving humanitarianism of present day life.
"The opposition in the present instance is confined, practically, to a single very powerful and magnificently disciplined church, but it is a very real opposition, and one that the eagle-eyed politician will always respect. Until that church can be persuaded to change its view ) and there, in my judgment, should be the focal point of attack ) all attempts to change this spuriously termed "moral" law will prove abortive."
George Packard. "Is Birth Control Legal?" Birth Control Review, Volume XV, Number 9 (September 1931), pages 248 to 250.
"... It is the opportunity to hold up before our youth the ideals of a Christian home. What will those ideals be? We will have to discover them; we do not fully know them yet. But at least we may be sure a Christian home will not be a home in which sex is thought to be naturally a filthy thing. It will not be a place where shame goes hand in hand with physical love. It will not be a place where the mother must bear child after child, some of them unfit to live, until her own health is forfeit. Rather it will be a place where children are wanted and where they are eagerly sought when health and finances permit. At other times it will be a place where physical love need not be burdened with the worry of unwanted pregnancies. Surely a Christian home ought to be at least this."
The Survey Graphic, August 1931, quoted in "In the Magazines: The Churches and the Stork." Birth Control Review, Volume XV, Number 9 (September 1931), pages 268 and 269.
1935
"Whatever else religion may teach today, it teaches that human progress is dependent on human initiative and human direction. Religion today regards man as able rationally and scientifically to control himself, his world, the world of energy, and the world of values for the satisfaction of human desires; and in proper proportions it glorifies these desires ...
"In accordance with this trend, the attitude of the church toward the whole problem of sex is changing. Religion is becoming actively interested in the erotic life where for ages the grossest ignorance and credulity, superstition and tyranny have held sway. In the place now occupied by such ignorance and credulity, such superstition and tyranny, the Church today will help you install knowledge and enlightened virtue.
"Too often in the past sex life has been thought of as largely an evil to be tolerated for the purpose of propagation. But as the church came to terms with science in other fields, it slowly capitulated in the field of sex. Here the church is no longer willing for nature to be uncontrolled by intelligence and scientific techniques. In recent years the following church organizations have gone on record in support of birth control:
Committee on Marriage and the Home of the Federal Council of the Churches of Christ inAmerica
Lambeth Conference of Bishops of the Church of England
General Council of Congregational and Christian Churches
Universalist General Convention
The American Unitarian Association
Central Conference of American Rabbis
New York East Conference and other regional sections of the Methodist Episcopal Church
Special Committee of the Women's Problems Group of the Philadelphia Yearly Meeting ofFriends
The 1934 Convention of the Y.W.C.A.
"The Rhythm method now making such rapid headway among Catholics, while not a satisfactory method of birth control, is nevertheless a distinct move in the direction of a modern attitude on the matter; for if sex life is ethical apart from propagation, then insistence on natural as distinguished from other scientific methods is an untenable position and will undoubtedly be abandoned in favor of techniques that offer greater safety than can the "safe period."
"The major cultural, ethical and religious significance of birth control is that it puts the realm of sex on the side of intelligence, control and human satisfactions. The basic importance of birth control is not primarily in its emphasis on the small family system ... but in its principle of intelligent control of life processes ... And perhaps most important of all, the mind of the public must be so educated that sex and all that pertains thereto can be thought and spoken of with the frankness that now prevails in the fields of dietetics and esthetics, or of ethics and religion."
Rev. Curtis W. Reese, Dean of the Abraham Lincoln Center, in a speech on the church and birth control. Birth Control Review, Volume II, Number 5 (New Series, February 1935), pages 2 and 3.
Quotes Supporting Illegal Activities from the Birth Control Review
From http://web.archive.org/web/20010430074932/www.hli.org/issues/pp/bcreview/bcr09.html
Quotes Supporting Illegal Activities from the Birth Control Review
1917
"Against the State, against the Church, against the silence of the medical profession, against the whole machinery of dead institutions of the past, the woman of to-day arises. She no longer pleads. She no longer implores. She no longer petitions. She is here to assert herself, to take back those rights which were formerly hers and hers alone. If she must break the law to establish her right to voluntary motherhood, then the law shall be broken."
Margaret Sanger. "Shall We Break This Law?" Birth Control Review, Volume I, Number 2 (February 1917), page 4.
1918
"Kitty Marion [a member of the Birth Control Review staff] has no apology to make for her violation of a dark age statute [New York State anti-contraceptive laws]. Neither have we one to make for her. We approve of her generous courage and we are proud of the unselfishness and fortitude with which she undergoes the penalty imposed by law for her work for women."
Margaret Sanger. "Judges With Small Families Jail Kitty Marion." Birth Control Review, Volume II, Number 11 (November 1918), page 5.
1924
"We also encourage, in every way in our power, the establishment of Birth Control clinics, both as specialized establishments and also in connection with hospitals and Health Centers. In order that this may be done we are obliged in many states to engage in agitation for the repeal of repressive laws, which forbid the imparting of physicians of Birth Control information.
"Perhaps the greatest progress that the movement has made this year is progress that is largely due to these men and women. Through constant propaganda, through speeches and writings, America, and indeed the whole world has begun to think of Birth Control."
"Editorial." Birth Control Review, Volume VIII, Number 7 (July 1924), pages 195 and 196.
1930
"I believe you should open a Birth Control clinic here tomorrow. The more prominent among you, socially, politically and financially, should sponsor the opening. You should accept responsibility for it. Your position in the community would make prejudiced cranks think twice
about raiding the place or trying to close it by police force. When it is closed, as it probably would be, your position would make the Courts view the breach of law more tolerantly. But the clinic might not be closed."
Mrs. Donald R. Hooker, quoted in "Annual Meeting of the Pennsylvania Birth Control Federation." Birth Control Review, Volume XIV, Number 1 (January 1930), page 23.
"My own point of view is that the statutes in question are so vicious and immoral that no form of attack on them should be overlooked. But I think it is obvious that Margaret Sanger's open violation of the law did more to focus public attention upon its iniquities than all the legislative campaigns that have been waged."
Carol Weiss King. "Use All Forms of Attack." Birth Control Review, Volume XIV, Number 11 (November 1930), page 311.
1931
"CANADA: Reverend Canon Lawrence Skey, rector of St. Anne's Anglican church in Toronto recently issued a statement that he would give birth control information to any young woman in his parish about to be married. Giving his reason for this defiance of Canadian law, he said: "I cannot permit women to go to their deaths from bearing too many children because doctors and governments will not inform them." No action was taken against the Canon."
"News Notes." Birth Control Review, Volume XV, Number 7 (July 1931), page 219.
"GERMANY: A nation-wide campaign for removal of all legal restrictions on birth control is being launched in Germany under the leadership of Frau Dr. Else Kienle-Jakobowski of Stuttgart. A "Committee for Self-Incrimination" has been formed, whose purpose it is to collect so many affidavits from violators that the courts will be swamped, and prosecutions impossible."
"News Notes." Birth Control Review, Volume XV, Number 7 (July 1931), page 219.
"But so great has become the mass production of laws in the last few years, that people are now beginning to reflect that a law that is not or cannot be enforced is a stench in the nostrils of human progress. Thinking people in constantly increasing numbers believe that there is all the difference in the world between evils that are essentially and by common consent deleterious to human society ) such as murder, rape, robbery and the like ) and actions that are declared wrong by legislation, about which there may be a division of opinion. The old common law used to describe this difference as mala in se and mala prohibita. People are becoming more and more convinced that no law can be enforced or should exist that does not have behind it a practically united public sentiment, and are setting off against our traditional law-mindedness a steadily increasing emphasis on personal liberty.
"The old cry that a law is a law, and just for that reason must be blindly obeyed, has no place in the modern forward-looking, liberty-loving humanitarianism of present day life.
"The opposition in the present instance is confined, practically, to a single very powerful and magnificently disciplined church, but it is a very real opposition, and one that the eagle-eyed politician will always respect. Until that church can be persuaded to change its view ) and there, in my judgment, should be the focal point of attack ) all attempts to change this spuriously termed "moral" law will prove abortive."
George Packard. "Is Birth Control Legal?" Birth Control Review, Volume XV, Number 9 (September 1931), pages 248 to 250.
"... And Mr. Packard seems to believe that the medical men are in some way capable of being policemen of our private affairs. Is it not just as "benighted, illogical and absurd" for one to assume that contraception can, or ought to be, restricted to married people as it is to oppose all ideas of birth control? ... I sympathize immensely with nullification [mass disobedience of the law]. All liberals must practice such nullification of many laws ..."
Gordon McWhirter of Berkeley, California. Letter to the Birth Control Review, Volume XV, Number 10 (October 1931), page 302.
1933
"The O'Malley anti-birth control bill, introduced into the Wisconsin legislature in March, was given a hearing before the Committee on Public Welfare on April 18th ... Supporting the bill were Catholic organizations, and petitions bearing 90,000 signatures according to newspaper accounts. Opposing the bill and denouncing it as a `vicious admixture of religion, politics, and ignorance' were church leaders, lawyers, members of the faculty of the University of Wisconsin, social workers, club women, doctors and mothers. Several educators and ministers stated that if the bill became a law they would consider it their duty to disregard it. Professor E.A. Ross of the University, (member of the editorial board of the [Birth Control] Review) summed up the opposition to the bill, saying: "Through ignorance you have created a monstrous bill ) one of the most shocking I have ever heard of. Pass this bill and you will have a nation of morons in 200 years.""
"Editorial." Birth Control Review, Volume XVII, Number 5 (May 1933), page 116.
Quotes Supporting Illegal Activities from the Birth Control Review
1917
"Against the State, against the Church, against the silence of the medical profession, against the whole machinery of dead institutions of the past, the woman of to-day arises. She no longer pleads. She no longer implores. She no longer petitions. She is here to assert herself, to take back those rights which were formerly hers and hers alone. If she must break the law to establish her right to voluntary motherhood, then the law shall be broken."
Margaret Sanger. "Shall We Break This Law?" Birth Control Review, Volume I, Number 2 (February 1917), page 4.
1918
"Kitty Marion [a member of the Birth Control Review staff] has no apology to make for her violation of a dark age statute [New York State anti-contraceptive laws]. Neither have we one to make for her. We approve of her generous courage and we are proud of the unselfishness and fortitude with which she undergoes the penalty imposed by law for her work for women."
Margaret Sanger. "Judges With Small Families Jail Kitty Marion." Birth Control Review, Volume II, Number 11 (November 1918), page 5.
1924
"We also encourage, in every way in our power, the establishment of Birth Control clinics, both as specialized establishments and also in connection with hospitals and Health Centers. In order that this may be done we are obliged in many states to engage in agitation for the repeal of repressive laws, which forbid the imparting of physicians of Birth Control information.
"Perhaps the greatest progress that the movement has made this year is progress that is largely due to these men and women. Through constant propaganda, through speeches and writings, America, and indeed the whole world has begun to think of Birth Control."
"Editorial." Birth Control Review, Volume VIII, Number 7 (July 1924), pages 195 and 196.
1930
"I believe you should open a Birth Control clinic here tomorrow. The more prominent among you, socially, politically and financially, should sponsor the opening. You should accept responsibility for it. Your position in the community would make prejudiced cranks think twice
about raiding the place or trying to close it by police force. When it is closed, as it probably would be, your position would make the Courts view the breach of law more tolerantly. But the clinic might not be closed."
Mrs. Donald R. Hooker, quoted in "Annual Meeting of the Pennsylvania Birth Control Federation." Birth Control Review, Volume XIV, Number 1 (January 1930), page 23.
"My own point of view is that the statutes in question are so vicious and immoral that no form of attack on them should be overlooked. But I think it is obvious that Margaret Sanger's open violation of the law did more to focus public attention upon its iniquities than all the legislative campaigns that have been waged."
Carol Weiss King. "Use All Forms of Attack." Birth Control Review, Volume XIV, Number 11 (November 1930), page 311.
1931
"CANADA: Reverend Canon Lawrence Skey, rector of St. Anne's Anglican church in Toronto recently issued a statement that he would give birth control information to any young woman in his parish about to be married. Giving his reason for this defiance of Canadian law, he said: "I cannot permit women to go to their deaths from bearing too many children because doctors and governments will not inform them." No action was taken against the Canon."
"News Notes." Birth Control Review, Volume XV, Number 7 (July 1931), page 219.
"GERMANY: A nation-wide campaign for removal of all legal restrictions on birth control is being launched in Germany under the leadership of Frau Dr. Else Kienle-Jakobowski of Stuttgart. A "Committee for Self-Incrimination" has been formed, whose purpose it is to collect so many affidavits from violators that the courts will be swamped, and prosecutions impossible."
"News Notes." Birth Control Review, Volume XV, Number 7 (July 1931), page 219.
"But so great has become the mass production of laws in the last few years, that people are now beginning to reflect that a law that is not or cannot be enforced is a stench in the nostrils of human progress. Thinking people in constantly increasing numbers believe that there is all the difference in the world between evils that are essentially and by common consent deleterious to human society ) such as murder, rape, robbery and the like ) and actions that are declared wrong by legislation, about which there may be a division of opinion. The old common law used to describe this difference as mala in se and mala prohibita. People are becoming more and more convinced that no law can be enforced or should exist that does not have behind it a practically united public sentiment, and are setting off against our traditional law-mindedness a steadily increasing emphasis on personal liberty.
"The old cry that a law is a law, and just for that reason must be blindly obeyed, has no place in the modern forward-looking, liberty-loving humanitarianism of present day life.
"The opposition in the present instance is confined, practically, to a single very powerful and magnificently disciplined church, but it is a very real opposition, and one that the eagle-eyed politician will always respect. Until that church can be persuaded to change its view ) and there, in my judgment, should be the focal point of attack ) all attempts to change this spuriously termed "moral" law will prove abortive."
George Packard. "Is Birth Control Legal?" Birth Control Review, Volume XV, Number 9 (September 1931), pages 248 to 250.
"... And Mr. Packard seems to believe that the medical men are in some way capable of being policemen of our private affairs. Is it not just as "benighted, illogical and absurd" for one to assume that contraception can, or ought to be, restricted to married people as it is to oppose all ideas of birth control? ... I sympathize immensely with nullification [mass disobedience of the law]. All liberals must practice such nullification of many laws ..."
Gordon McWhirter of Berkeley, California. Letter to the Birth Control Review, Volume XV, Number 10 (October 1931), page 302.
1933
"The O'Malley anti-birth control bill, introduced into the Wisconsin legislature in March, was given a hearing before the Committee on Public Welfare on April 18th ... Supporting the bill were Catholic organizations, and petitions bearing 90,000 signatures according to newspaper accounts. Opposing the bill and denouncing it as a `vicious admixture of religion, politics, and ignorance' were church leaders, lawyers, members of the faculty of the University of Wisconsin, social workers, club women, doctors and mothers. Several educators and ministers stated that if the bill became a law they would consider it their duty to disregard it. Professor E.A. Ross of the University, (member of the editorial board of the [Birth Control] Review) summed up the opposition to the bill, saying: "Through ignorance you have created a monstrous bill ) one of the most shocking I have ever heard of. Pass this bill and you will have a nation of morons in 200 years.""
"Editorial." Birth Control Review, Volume XVII, Number 5 (May 1933), page 116.
by Kat McConnell
by Kat McConnell
McCain: Foot Soldier in New World Order
April 15, 2008 10:00 AM EST
Since the stinging defeat of the McCain-Kennedy comprehensive 'amnesty' bill, Senator McCain has begrudgingly paid lip service on the campaign trail to Americans concerned about illegal immigration. Chanting his new mantra that 'he gets it' and 'we must secure the borders first,' he has avoided discussing his plans for amnesty. His dubious promises on border security have clearly been intended to manipulate conservative voters, the same voters he treats with obvious disdain and condescension. Mocking Ronald Reagan's conservatism, McCain has even declared himself a 'foot soldier in the Reagan revolution,' a reference surely prompting our fortieth president to turn over in his grave!
McCain's World Affairs speech must rightfully be considered his 'coming out' speech in which he unflinchingly revealed his true globalist nature and his mission as a 'foot soldier in the New World Order'. Thanks to his arrogance, which likely propelled him to openly disclose his One World vision, we have been given a chance to reconsider McCain as the Republican nominee and possible President of the United States. We can only hope that his words will be his undoing.
McCain boldly declared, 'We have to strengthen our global alliances as the core of a new global compact -- a League of Democracies'..' and 'we must also lead by' creating the new international institutions necessary to advance the peace and freedoms we cherish.' [1] The obvious question is – haven't we had enough of the massively corrupt United Nations and other international institutions trampling on U.S. sovereignty, interfering in American policy, and draining the life-blood from our country? What has the U.N. accomplished in its 60-year existence other than the largest theft in world history with the oil-for-food program and turning its back on the Darfur, Rwandan and other genocides? With moral leadership, why can't the U.S. be an upstanding citizen of our world without becoming ensnared in new international treaties that would forever alter the guardian of our republic, the Constitution?
Even more frightening is what McCain has in store for America right here at home. As president, McCain will be in a position to fulfill his directives for dissolving America's sovereignty. 'With globalization, our hemisphere has grown closer, more integrated, and more interdependent'.. Americans north and south share a common geography and a common destiny. The countries of Latin America are the natural partners of the United States, and our northern neighbor Canada'.Relations with our southern neighbors must be governed by mutual respect, not by an imperial impulse or by anti-American demagoguery. The promise of North, Central, and South American life is too great for that. I believe the Americas can and must be the model for a new 21st century relationship between North and South. Ours can be the first completely democratic hemisphere, where trade is free across all borders, where the rule of law and the power of free markets advance the security and prosperity of all.' [1]
Common destiny? Are we to accept Senator McCain's 21st century utopian desire to join the U.S. with our neighbor to the south, Mexico, one of the most corrupt, crime-ridden and lawless nations on the planet? [2,3] While we may share a common border, we absolutely do not share a common culture, nor do we share a common destiny.
Make no mistake. If granted the power of the presidency, McCain will strive to dismantle the sovereignty of the United States of America. This 'unashamed and unabashed defender of NAFTA' [4] will follow in the footsteps of previous administrations to further the integration of the U.S., Canada and Mexico under the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) into a homogenized North American hemisphere, complete with a North American Parliament and court system. This plan is being openly promoted by many such as former U.S. Congressman David Bonior [5-7], former Mexican President Vicente Fox [8], academics [9-12], and numerous think-tanks [9, 13, 14].
The end results will be the wiping out of national borders and our self-determination, and ultimately the subordination of our precious Constitution, the guarantor of our liberties, to a North American superstate similar to the European Union (EU). Ask the Brits or French how they like being voiceless citizens of the EU, ruled by unelected bureaucrats, their national heritage and history drowned out by a sea of third world immigrants, and having the 'Reform Treaty,' [15] a.k.a., the 'EU Constitution,' shoved down their collective throats without national referenda . Will we allow the same to happen here under a President McCain?
More than a million American heroes have lost their lives to keep America free. They surely did not die for a North American Union!
In McCain's 25-year tenure in the United States House and Senate, he has shown little or no respect for the Constitutional rights and freedoms of Americans. Instead, he has teamed up with America-hating globalists like George Soros to squash our first amendment right to free speech via McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform [16], and attempted to destroy our second amendment rights through the McCain-Lieberman Gun Show Control bill [17]. Neither has McCain shown any commitment to preserve American sovereignty or to protect American taxpayers. Instead, he continues to be a proponent of amnesty for illegal aliens, going so far as to enlist to his campaign Juan Hernandez, former Mexican government cabinet member and amnesty and open borders advocate, for the purpose of carrying McCain's message to the Hispanic population as his Hispanic Outreach Director [18]. While trumpeting fiscal conservatism and earmark reform, McCain has remained mute on the budget-busting price tag for amnesty, projected to be at least $2.6 trillion for entitlement, health care and other programs required to support 12 million illegal aliens [19]. Can you say endless tax increases? Meanwhile, border security has been barely a blip on the radar screen of this self-appointed national security expert, despite repeated Mexican military incursions onto U.S. soil, virtually unchecked human trafficking and drug smuggling, and escalating violence and kidnappings of his own Arizona constituents along our border with Mexico.
Since the SPP was launched in 2005 by President Bush, President Fox of Mexico and Prime Minister Martin of Canada [20], McCain, together with Senators on both sides of the aisle, has sponsored multiple pieces of amnesty and border legislation [21]. Had these bills passed, a little-known provision would have initiated 'binational health care infrastructure and health insurance' with Mexico. A second provision would have mandated the securing of Mexico's southern border, not ours, thus implementing a 'common North American security perimeter,' a critical goal outlined in the Council on Foreign Relations task force report, Building a North American Community [9]. Following the failure of this provision to be made law, the Merida Initiative, a $1.4 billion aid package to Mexico rumored to include the securing of Mexico's southern border, was announced by President Bush but has not received Congressional approval to date [22].
In this presidential race, there is no 'lesser of the evils.' We are being presented with a triple threat and each choice is equally dangerous. Yet, Congressional gridlock seems more probable with a Democrat as President, while Republicans in Congress would likely roll over for John McCain. Regardless, a McCain Presidency would be an unmitigated disaster for our country. With no hope for the top of the ticket, Americans must carefully choose Senators and Congressmen who will have the courage to stop the next President from advancing a dangerous agenda.
Knowing McCain's dark history, his desire for power, and his vision for the destruction of America he so boldly revealed, will patriotic Americans make this devout 'foot soldier in the New World Order' the next Commander-In-Chief? If McCain swears to uphold the Constitution of the United States in his oath of office with his hand upon the Bible, will his words be nothing more than bald-faced lies?
1. Remarks by John McCain to the Los Angeles World Affairs Council, March 26, 2008.
https://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/News/Speeches/872473dd-9ccb-4ab4-9d0d-ec54f0e7a497.htm
2. Mexico drug war opens bloody new front on US border. Wed Mar 26, 2008. http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSN26354004
3. Mexico 2008 Crime & Safety Report: Mexico City. Overseas Security Advisory Council. Americas – Mexico. March 10, 2008. https://www.osac.gov/Reports/report.cfm?contentID=79890
4. McCain eyes U.S. free trade deal with EU. Speech to the Los Angeles World Affairs Council. March 26, 2008. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080326/pl_nm/usa_politics_mccain_trade_dc
5. A Bill of Rights for NAFTA? Former congressional leader David Bonior, in residence this week, proposes a parliament of the Americas. April 2, 2003. http://www.berkeley.edu/news/berkeleyan/2003/04/02_bonior.shtml
6. NAPU: A New Trajectory for Globalization. Amy Lerman. http://socrates.berkeley.edu:7001/Events/spring2003/04-03-03-boniornapu/index.html April 3, 2003.
7. A New Deal for the New World. David Bonior and Carlos Heredia. http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/bonior1
8. Vicente Fox on The Daily Show. October 2007. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyq4gzvAeRc
9. Building a North American Community. Report of the Independent Task Force on North America. Council on Foreign Relations. May 2005. http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/NorthAmerica_TF_final.pdf
10. The U.S., Mexico, and North America. Robert A. Pastor. Testimony to U.S. House of Representatives Committee on International Relations, Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere. April 26, 2006. http://www.american.edu/ia/cnas/pdfs/testimony_pastor_april262007.pdf
11. A North American Community Approach to Security. Robert Pastor. Testimony Invited by the Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere. U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee. June 9, 2005. http://www.senate.gov/~foreign/testimony/2005/PastorTestimony050609.pdf
12. International lecturer informs community of a future 'mega state'. Valinn McReynolds. The Oskaloosa Herald. March 19, 2008. http://www.oskaloosaherald.com/homepage/local_story_079112629.html?keyword=leadpicturestory
13. North American Future 2025 Project. Center for Strategic and International Studies. Armand B. Peschard-Sverdrup. 2007. http://www.canadians.org/water/documents/NA_Future_2025.pdf
14. Negotiating North America: The Security and Prosperity Partnership. Greg Anderson and Christopher Sands. Hudson Institute. Summer 2007. http://hudson.org/files/pdf_upload/HudsonNegotiatingNorthAmericaadvanceproof2.pdf
15. The EU Lisbon Treaty: Gordon Brown Surrenders Britain's Sovereignty. Nile Gardiner and Sally McNamara. Heritage Foundation. March 7, 2008. http://www.heritage.org/Research/Europe/wm1840.cfm
16. Author: George Soros brains behind McCain-Feingold. 'Activist wanted limits on advertising after Hillarycare defeat.' Jerome Corsi. World Net Daily. February 18, 2008. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=56745
17. Gun Games. Truth is a Casualty of the Anti-Gun Cause. Dave Kopel. National Review Online. May 21, 2002.
http://www.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel052102.asp
18. John McCain's open-borders outreach director. January 25, 2008. Michelle Malkin. http://michellemalkin.com/2008/01/25/john-mccains-open-borders-outreach-director-the-next-dhs-secretary/
19. Amnesty Will Cost U.S. Taxpayers at Least $2.6 Trillion. Robert Rector. Heritage Foundation, June 6, 2007. http://www.heritage.org/Research/Immigration/upload/wm_1490.pdf
20. Security and Prosperity Partnership. www.spp.gov
21. Senate bills: Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007 (S. 1348/S.1639), May 2007; Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 (S.2611), May 2006; North American Cooperative Security Act (S.853), April 20, 2005; Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act (S.1033), May 12, 2005.
22. Document Details U.S. Aid Proposed For Mexico. Aircraft a Major Focus Of Anti-Drug Package. Manuel Roig-Franzia. Washington Post. October 27, 2007. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/26/AR2007102602289_pf.html
McCain: Foot Soldier in New World Order
April 15, 2008 10:00 AM EST
Since the stinging defeat of the McCain-Kennedy comprehensive 'amnesty' bill, Senator McCain has begrudgingly paid lip service on the campaign trail to Americans concerned about illegal immigration. Chanting his new mantra that 'he gets it' and 'we must secure the borders first,' he has avoided discussing his plans for amnesty. His dubious promises on border security have clearly been intended to manipulate conservative voters, the same voters he treats with obvious disdain and condescension. Mocking Ronald Reagan's conservatism, McCain has even declared himself a 'foot soldier in the Reagan revolution,' a reference surely prompting our fortieth president to turn over in his grave!
McCain's World Affairs speech must rightfully be considered his 'coming out' speech in which he unflinchingly revealed his true globalist nature and his mission as a 'foot soldier in the New World Order'. Thanks to his arrogance, which likely propelled him to openly disclose his One World vision, we have been given a chance to reconsider McCain as the Republican nominee and possible President of the United States. We can only hope that his words will be his undoing.
McCain boldly declared, 'We have to strengthen our global alliances as the core of a new global compact -- a League of Democracies'..' and 'we must also lead by' creating the new international institutions necessary to advance the peace and freedoms we cherish.' [1] The obvious question is – haven't we had enough of the massively corrupt United Nations and other international institutions trampling on U.S. sovereignty, interfering in American policy, and draining the life-blood from our country? What has the U.N. accomplished in its 60-year existence other than the largest theft in world history with the oil-for-food program and turning its back on the Darfur, Rwandan and other genocides? With moral leadership, why can't the U.S. be an upstanding citizen of our world without becoming ensnared in new international treaties that would forever alter the guardian of our republic, the Constitution?
Even more frightening is what McCain has in store for America right here at home. As president, McCain will be in a position to fulfill his directives for dissolving America's sovereignty. 'With globalization, our hemisphere has grown closer, more integrated, and more interdependent'.. Americans north and south share a common geography and a common destiny. The countries of Latin America are the natural partners of the United States, and our northern neighbor Canada'.Relations with our southern neighbors must be governed by mutual respect, not by an imperial impulse or by anti-American demagoguery. The promise of North, Central, and South American life is too great for that. I believe the Americas can and must be the model for a new 21st century relationship between North and South. Ours can be the first completely democratic hemisphere, where trade is free across all borders, where the rule of law and the power of free markets advance the security and prosperity of all.' [1]
Common destiny? Are we to accept Senator McCain's 21st century utopian desire to join the U.S. with our neighbor to the south, Mexico, one of the most corrupt, crime-ridden and lawless nations on the planet? [2,3] While we may share a common border, we absolutely do not share a common culture, nor do we share a common destiny.
Make no mistake. If granted the power of the presidency, McCain will strive to dismantle the sovereignty of the United States of America. This 'unashamed and unabashed defender of NAFTA' [4] will follow in the footsteps of previous administrations to further the integration of the U.S., Canada and Mexico under the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) into a homogenized North American hemisphere, complete with a North American Parliament and court system. This plan is being openly promoted by many such as former U.S. Congressman David Bonior [5-7], former Mexican President Vicente Fox [8], academics [9-12], and numerous think-tanks [9, 13, 14].
The end results will be the wiping out of national borders and our self-determination, and ultimately the subordination of our precious Constitution, the guarantor of our liberties, to a North American superstate similar to the European Union (EU). Ask the Brits or French how they like being voiceless citizens of the EU, ruled by unelected bureaucrats, their national heritage and history drowned out by a sea of third world immigrants, and having the 'Reform Treaty,' [15] a.k.a., the 'EU Constitution,' shoved down their collective throats without national referenda . Will we allow the same to happen here under a President McCain?
More than a million American heroes have lost their lives to keep America free. They surely did not die for a North American Union!
In McCain's 25-year tenure in the United States House and Senate, he has shown little or no respect for the Constitutional rights and freedoms of Americans. Instead, he has teamed up with America-hating globalists like George Soros to squash our first amendment right to free speech via McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform [16], and attempted to destroy our second amendment rights through the McCain-Lieberman Gun Show Control bill [17]. Neither has McCain shown any commitment to preserve American sovereignty or to protect American taxpayers. Instead, he continues to be a proponent of amnesty for illegal aliens, going so far as to enlist to his campaign Juan Hernandez, former Mexican government cabinet member and amnesty and open borders advocate, for the purpose of carrying McCain's message to the Hispanic population as his Hispanic Outreach Director [18]. While trumpeting fiscal conservatism and earmark reform, McCain has remained mute on the budget-busting price tag for amnesty, projected to be at least $2.6 trillion for entitlement, health care and other programs required to support 12 million illegal aliens [19]. Can you say endless tax increases? Meanwhile, border security has been barely a blip on the radar screen of this self-appointed national security expert, despite repeated Mexican military incursions onto U.S. soil, virtually unchecked human trafficking and drug smuggling, and escalating violence and kidnappings of his own Arizona constituents along our border with Mexico.
Since the SPP was launched in 2005 by President Bush, President Fox of Mexico and Prime Minister Martin of Canada [20], McCain, together with Senators on both sides of the aisle, has sponsored multiple pieces of amnesty and border legislation [21]. Had these bills passed, a little-known provision would have initiated 'binational health care infrastructure and health insurance' with Mexico. A second provision would have mandated the securing of Mexico's southern border, not ours, thus implementing a 'common North American security perimeter,' a critical goal outlined in the Council on Foreign Relations task force report, Building a North American Community [9]. Following the failure of this provision to be made law, the Merida Initiative, a $1.4 billion aid package to Mexico rumored to include the securing of Mexico's southern border, was announced by President Bush but has not received Congressional approval to date [22].
In this presidential race, there is no 'lesser of the evils.' We are being presented with a triple threat and each choice is equally dangerous. Yet, Congressional gridlock seems more probable with a Democrat as President, while Republicans in Congress would likely roll over for John McCain. Regardless, a McCain Presidency would be an unmitigated disaster for our country. With no hope for the top of the ticket, Americans must carefully choose Senators and Congressmen who will have the courage to stop the next President from advancing a dangerous agenda.
Knowing McCain's dark history, his desire for power, and his vision for the destruction of America he so boldly revealed, will patriotic Americans make this devout 'foot soldier in the New World Order' the next Commander-In-Chief? If McCain swears to uphold the Constitution of the United States in his oath of office with his hand upon the Bible, will his words be nothing more than bald-faced lies?
1. Remarks by John McCain to the Los Angeles World Affairs Council, March 26, 2008.
https://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/News/Speeches/872473dd-9ccb-4ab4-9d0d-ec54f0e7a497.htm
2. Mexico drug war opens bloody new front on US border. Wed Mar 26, 2008. http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSN26354004
3. Mexico 2008 Crime & Safety Report: Mexico City. Overseas Security Advisory Council. Americas – Mexico. March 10, 2008. https://www.osac.gov/Reports/report.cfm?contentID=79890
4. McCain eyes U.S. free trade deal with EU. Speech to the Los Angeles World Affairs Council. March 26, 2008. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080326/pl_nm/usa_politics_mccain_trade_dc
5. A Bill of Rights for NAFTA? Former congressional leader David Bonior, in residence this week, proposes a parliament of the Americas. April 2, 2003. http://www.berkeley.edu/news/berkeleyan/2003/04/02_bonior.shtml
6. NAPU: A New Trajectory for Globalization. Amy Lerman. http://socrates.berkeley.edu:7001/Events/spring2003/04-03-03-boniornapu/index.html April 3, 2003.
7. A New Deal for the New World. David Bonior and Carlos Heredia. http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/bonior1
8. Vicente Fox on The Daily Show. October 2007. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyq4gzvAeRc
9. Building a North American Community. Report of the Independent Task Force on North America. Council on Foreign Relations. May 2005. http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/NorthAmerica_TF_final.pdf
10. The U.S., Mexico, and North America. Robert A. Pastor. Testimony to U.S. House of Representatives Committee on International Relations, Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere. April 26, 2006. http://www.american.edu/ia/cnas/pdfs/testimony_pastor_april262007.pdf
11. A North American Community Approach to Security. Robert Pastor. Testimony Invited by the Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere. U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee. June 9, 2005. http://www.senate.gov/~foreign/testimony/2005/PastorTestimony050609.pdf
12. International lecturer informs community of a future 'mega state'. Valinn McReynolds. The Oskaloosa Herald. March 19, 2008. http://www.oskaloosaherald.com/homepage/local_story_079112629.html?keyword=leadpicturestory
13. North American Future 2025 Project. Center for Strategic and International Studies. Armand B. Peschard-Sverdrup. 2007. http://www.canadians.org/water/documents/NA_Future_2025.pdf
14. Negotiating North America: The Security and Prosperity Partnership. Greg Anderson and Christopher Sands. Hudson Institute. Summer 2007. http://hudson.org/files/pdf_upload/HudsonNegotiatingNorthAmericaadvanceproof2.pdf
15. The EU Lisbon Treaty: Gordon Brown Surrenders Britain's Sovereignty. Nile Gardiner and Sally McNamara. Heritage Foundation. March 7, 2008. http://www.heritage.org/Research/Europe/wm1840.cfm
16. Author: George Soros brains behind McCain-Feingold. 'Activist wanted limits on advertising after Hillarycare defeat.' Jerome Corsi. World Net Daily. February 18, 2008. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=56745
17. Gun Games. Truth is a Casualty of the Anti-Gun Cause. Dave Kopel. National Review Online. May 21, 2002.
http://www.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel052102.asp
18. John McCain's open-borders outreach director. January 25, 2008. Michelle Malkin. http://michellemalkin.com/2008/01/25/john-mccains-open-borders-outreach-director-the-next-dhs-secretary/
19. Amnesty Will Cost U.S. Taxpayers at Least $2.6 Trillion. Robert Rector. Heritage Foundation, June 6, 2007. http://www.heritage.org/Research/Immigration/upload/wm_1490.pdf
20. Security and Prosperity Partnership. www.spp.gov
21. Senate bills: Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007 (S. 1348/S.1639), May 2007; Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 (S.2611), May 2006; North American Cooperative Security Act (S.853), April 20, 2005; Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act (S.1033), May 12, 2005.
22. Document Details U.S. Aid Proposed For Mexico. Aircraft a Major Focus Of Anti-Drug Package. Manuel Roig-Franzia. Washington Post. October 27, 2007. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/26/AR2007102602289_pf.html
Saturday, September 27, 2008
Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
From
http://web.archive.org/web/20071024003150/http://emporium.turnpike.net/C/cs/quest.htm
Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
If so, then provide an answer to the following questions. "Evolution" in this context is the idea that natural, undirected processes are sufficient to account for the existence of all natural things.- Something from nothing?
The "Big Bang", the most widely accepted theory of the beginning of the universe, states that everything developed from a small dense cloud of subatomic particles and radiation which exploded, forming hydrogen (and some helium) gas. Where did this energy/matter come from? How reasonable is it to assume it came into being from nothing? And even if it did come into being, what would cause it to explode?We know from common experience that explosions are destructive and lead to disorder. How reasonable is it to assume that a "big bang" explosion produced the opposite effect - increasing "information", order and the formation of useful structures, such as stars and planets, and eventually people?
- Physical laws an accident?
We know the universe is governed by several fundamental physical laws, such as electromagnetic forces, gravity, conservation of mass and energy, etc. The activities of our universe depend upon these principles like a computer program depends upon the existence of computer hardware with an instruction set. How reasonable is it to say that these great controlling principles developed by accident? - Order from disorder?
The Second Law of Thermodynamics may be the most verified law of science. It states that systems become more disordered over time, unless energy is supplied and directed to create order. Evolutionists says that the opposite has taken place - that order increased over time, without any directed energy. How can this be?ASIDE: Evolutionists commonly object that the Second Law applies to closed, or isolated systems, and that the Earth is certainly not a closed system (it gets lots of raw energy from the Sun, for example). However, all systems, whether open or closed, tend to deteriorate. For example, living organisms are open systems but they all decay and die. Also, the universe in total is a closed system. To say that the chaos of the big bang has transformed itself into the human brain with its 120 trillion connections is a clear violation of the Second Law.
We should also point out that the availability of raw energy to a system is a necessary but far from sufficient condition for a local decrease in entropy to occur. Certainly the application of a blow torch to bicycle parts will not result in a bicycle being assembled - only the careful application of directed energy will, such as from the hands of a person following a plan. The presence of energy from the Sun does NOT solve the evolutionist's problem of how increasing order could occur on the Earth, contrary to the Second Law.
- Information from Randomness?
Information theory states that "information" never arises out of randomness or chance events. Our human experience verifies this every day. How can the origin of the tremendous increase in information from simple organisms up to man be accounted for? Information is always introduced from the outside. It is impossible for natural processes to produce their own actual information, or meaning, which is what evolutionists claim has happened. Random typing might produce the string "dog", but it only means something to an intelligent observer who has applied a definition to this sequence of letters. The generation of information always requires intelligence, yet evolution claims that no intelligence was involved in the ultimate formation of a human being whose many systems contain vast amounts of information. - Life from dead chemicals?
Evolutionists claim that life formed from non-life (dead chemicals), so-called "abiogenesis", even though it is a biological law ("biogenesis") that life only comes from life. The probability of the simplest imaginable replicating system forming by itself from non-living chemicals has been calculated to be so very small as to be essentially zero - much less than one chance in the number of electron-sized particles that could fit in the entire visible universe! Given these odds, is it reasonable to believe that life formed itself? - Complex DNA and RNA by chance?
The continued existence (the reproduction) of a cell requires both DNA (the "plan") and RNA (the "copy mechanism"), both of which are tremendously complex. How reasonable is it to believe that these two co-dependent necessities came into existence by chance at exactly the same time? - Life is complex.
We know and appreciate the tremendous amount of intelligent design and planning that went into landing a man on the moon. Yet the complexity of this task pales in comparison to the complexity of even the simplest life form. How reasonable is it to believe that purely natural processes, with no designer, no intelligence, and no plan, produced a human being. - Where are the transitional fossils?
If evolution has taken place our museums should be overflowing with the skeletons of countless transitional forms. Yet after over one hundred years of intense searching only a small number of transitional candidates are touted as proof of evolution. If evolution has really taken place, where are the transitional forms? And why does the fossil record actually show all species first appearing fully formed, with most nearly identical to current instances of the species?ASIDE: Most of the examples touted by evolutionists concentrate on just one feature of the anatomy, like a particular bone or the skull. A true transitional fossil should be intermediate in many if not all aspects. The next time someone shows you how this bone changed over time, ask them about the rest of the creature too!
Many evolutionists still like to believe in the "scarcity" of the fossil record. Yet simple statistics will show that given you have found a number of fossil instances of a creature, the chances that you have missed every one of its imagined predecessors is very small. Consider the trilobites for example. These fossils are so common you can buy one for under $20, yet no fossils of a predecessor have been found!.
- Could an intermediate even survive?
Evolution requires the transition from one kind to another to be gradual. And don't forget that "natural selection" is supposed to retain those individuals which have developed an advantage of some sort. How could an animal intermediate between one kind and another even survive (and why would it ever be selected for), when it would not be well-suited to either its old environment or its new environment? Can you even imagine a possible sequence of small changes which takes a creature from one kind to another, all the while keeping it not only alive, but improved?ASIDE: Certainly a "light-sensitive spot" is better than no vision at all. But why would such a spot even develop? (evolutionists like to take this for granted). And even if it did develop, to believe that mutations of such a spot eventually brought about the tremendous complexities of the human eye strains all common sense and experience.
- Reproduction without reproduction?
A main tenet of evolution is the idea that things develop by an (unguided) series of small changes, caused by mutations, which are "selected" for, keeping the "better" changes" over a very long period of time. How could the ability to reproduce evolve, without the ability to reproduce? Can you even imagine a theoretical scenario which would allow this to happen? And why would evolution produce two sexes, many times over? Asexual reproduction would seem to be more likely and efficient!ASIDE: To relegate the question of reproduction to "abiogenesis" does NOT address the problem. To assume existing, reproducing life for the principles of evolution to work on is a HUGE assumption which is seldom focused on in popular discussions.
- Plants without photosynthesis?
The process of photosynthesis in plants is very complex. How could the first plant survive unless it already possessed this remarkable capability? - How do you explain symbiotic relationships?
There are many examples of plants and animals which have a "symbiotic" relationship (they need each other to survive). How can evolution explain this? - It's no good unless it's complete.
We know from everyday experience that an item is not generally useful until it is complete, whether it be a car, a cake, or a computer program. Why would natural selection start to make an eye, or an ear, or a wing (or anything else) when this item would not benefit the animal until it was completed?ASIDE: Note that even a "light-sensitive spot" or the simplest version of any feature is far from a "one-jump" change that is trivial to produce.
- Explain metamorphosis!
How can evolution explain the metamorphosis of the butterfly? Once the caterpillar evolves into the "mass of jelly" (out of which the butterfly comes), wouldn't it appear to be "stuck"? - It should be easy to show evolution.
If evolution is the grand mechanism that has produced all natural things from a simple gas, surely this mechanism must be easily seen. It should be possible to prove its existence in a matter of weeks or days, if not hours. Yet scientists have been bombarding countless generations of fruit flies with radiation for several decades in order to show evolution in action and still have only produced ... more (deformed) fruit flies. How reasonable is it to believe that evolution is a fact when even the simplest of experiments has not been able to document it?ASIDE: The artificial creation of a new species is far too small of a change to prove that true "macro-evolution" is possible. A higher-order change, where the information content of the organism has been increased should be showable and is not. Developing a new species changes the existing information, but does not add new information, such as would be needed for a new organ, for example.
- Complex things require intelligent design folks!
People are intelligent. If a team of engineers were to one day design a robot which could cross all types of terrain, could dig large holes, could carry several times its weight, found its own energy sources, could make more robots like itself, and was only 1/8 of an inch tall, we would marvel at this achievement. All of our life's experiences lead us to know that such a robot could never come about by accident, or assemble itself by chance, even if all of the parts were available laying next to each other. And we are certain beyond doubt that a canister of hydrogen gas, no matter how long we left it there or what type of raw energy we might apply to it, would never result in such a robot being produced. But we already have such a "robot" - it is called an "ant", and we squash them because they are "nothing" compared to people. And God made them, and he made us. Can there be any other explanation?
Friday, September 12, 2008
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Tuesday, September 09, 2008
Religious interview about Freemasonry and the Boule
____________________
________________________________
_____________________
http://prorege-forum.com/forum_entry.php?id=2696&page=0&category=Masons&order=time&PHPSESSID=e1b11
Saturday, September 06, 2008
Friday, September 05, 2008
9/11
From http://www.rense.com/general25/knewknow.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rense.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bush Knew...And Now
The Entire World Knows
By Larry Chin
Online Journal Contributing Editor
5-21-2
All the desperate lies and spin don't change the fact that the Bush administration had foreknowledge of the Sept. 11 attacks...
George W. Bush knew. And his administration knew. The transparently dishonest denials issued by the White House do not stand up to the slightest scrutiny. They are lying. A simple examination of existing information, gathered from reliable, open sources proves it. Last night, Michael C. Ruppert of From The Wilderness was scheduled to present his case for Bush 9/11 foreknowledge before a national TV audience on Geraldo Rivera's Fox News program. At the last minutes, this live appearance was cancelled. Coincidence? Ruppert's appearance, which could have caused immeasurable damage to the administration, was allegedly prompted by "breaking news" from the White House suggesting "imminent new terrorist attacks." "Wag the dog"? What desperate measures will this cabal resort to in order to remain in power? How many more lives will they take?
Backed into a Corner at Every Turn
On May 15, Press Secretary and official White House liar Ari Fleischer nervously stuttered, "The president did not receive information about the use of airplanes as missiles by suicide bombers. This was a new type of attack that was not foreseen."
This was followed by Condoleeza Rice, who repeated the spin: "I don't think that anyone could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center." Bush himself issued a statement that he had no indication beforehand that "terrorists would hijack jets and deliberately crash them." The White House would have us believe that not a single individual in the entire US government, nor the entire Central Intelligence Agency, had knowledge about a method of terrorism that has been routine for more than 20 years. And that not a single person in the entire national security apparatus of the US had a shred of information on training camps in Iran (a hotspot of intense US intelligence focus for decades) devoted to this method of terrorism.
Yossef Bodansky is a director of the Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare in the US House of Representatives, and the author of the book "Bin Laden: The Man Who Targeted America." Bodansky is a Washington insider whose views are sought after, respected and broadly disseminated throughout the US government.
In a well-publicized paper from 1993, he stated, "The training of suicide pilots started in the Busher air base in Iran in the early 1980s with some 90 Pilatus PC-7 aircraft purchased from Switzerland." "According to a former trainee in Wakilibad (a base for the training of kamikaze pilots), one of the exercises included having an Islamic Jihad detachment seize (or hijack) a transport aircraft. Then trained air crews from among the terrorists would crash the airliner with its passengers into a selected objective," he wrote.
"The leading terrorists are known as 'Afghans,' having been trained with the mujahadeen in Pakistan. Some fought in Afghanistan. Muslim volunteers from several Arab and Asian countries were encouraged to come to Pakistan and join the Afghan Jihad." (Source: Target America: Terrorism in the US Today, 1993. "Islamic Terrorism in the United States," National Security Caucus, 1996.)
The Bush administration would have us believe that a subject that was written about in books and discussed openly throughout Washington is "unimaginable."
They would also have us believe that they, and their intelligence operatives, have been unaware of some of the most spectacular and horrific terrorist operations in recent history-many of them directed at the United States.
Yet:
On December 29, 1994, four terrorists alleged to have ties to Osama bin Laden hijacked Air France Flight 8969, a flight from Algiers to Paris. They loaded the plane with explosives and filled it with extra fuel, with the intent of ramming it into the Eiffel Tower. Commandos stormed the plane and killed the hijackers. (Source: NBC News. September 30, 2001. Chris Hansen, "The Lesson of Air France Flight 8969")
A full seven years before September 11, an al-Qaeda suicide hijacking is partially executed and barely stopped by French intelligence. The Bush administration would have us believe that no one in the CIA had ever heard of such a thing.
Another suicide hijacking plot was discovered six years before September 11. Ramsey Youssef, the terrorist who masterminded the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center had detailed plans to hijack and crash commercial airliners into buildings in the US, and blow up 12 US airliners during international flights over a two-day period. This plot, known as Operation Bojinka, was discovered by Philippine intelligence agents in 1995, in the hideout of Yousef and Abdul Hakim Murad, a US trained pilot linked to bin Laden. Philippine authorities passed this information to the FBI. This plot was disclosed again in the 1997 trial of Youssef. (Source: Kevin Cullen, Ralph Ranalli. Boston Globe, Sept 18, 2001, "Flight School Said FBI Trailed Suspect Prior to Hijackings")
Two years before 9/11, reports prepared for U.S. intelligence warned that Osama bin Laden would hijack an airliner and fly it into government buildings like the Pentagon. "Suicide bomber(s) belonging to al-Qaeda's Martyrdom Battalion could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives (C-4 and semtex) into the Pentagon, the headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or the White House,'' the September 1999 report said. (Source: Associated Press, May 17, 2002).
In July 2001, during the G8 Summit in Genoa, Italy, Deputy Prime Minister Gianfranco Fini revealed that Italian intelligence had uncovered a plot to crash a hijacked commercial airliner into either Air Force One or one of the buildings used for the summit. (Source: New York Newsday, Sept 19, 2001) This jetliner kamikaze plot was directed at Bush himself. Taking the Bush denial to its logical extension, the White House would have us believe that Bush and the CIA were not only unaware of this plot, but also not warned by the Italian government.
During the investigation into the 1998 US embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, intelligence officials and FBI were alerted that two bin Laden associates had been trained as pilots. Airman Flight School in Oklahoma became the focus of an FBI investigation. The FBI was warned in August 2001 that Zacarias Moussauoi, the notorious "20th pilot" who attended Airman was only interested in steering a plane-and not taking off or landing. He also specifically asked about New York City air space.
In June 2001, the German BND warned the CIA and Israel of plans by Middle Eastern terrorists to "hijack commercial aircraft to use as weapons to attack important symbols of American and Israeli culture." Furthermore, according to the same source, the Echelon spy network was used to break this news, and that intelligence agents in the UK also had advance warning. (Source: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, September 14, 2001)
In the summer of 2001, Russian intelligence and President Vladimir Putin warned the CIA that 25 terrorist pilots were going to hijack commercial aircraft for suicide missions.
Attorney David Shippers, who led the impeachment case against Bill Clinton, warned Attorney General John Ashcroft and Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert that he had proof from a credible source (that he has still not revealed) about a plot to use hijacked commercial airliners to ram the White House and Capitol. (Source: Info Wars (radio program) Oct 10 2001)
This list of specific warnings about suicide hijackings is but the tip of the iceberg. The Bush administration received many more warnings of an imminent attack from foreign governments (Israel, Germany, Egypt, UK, Russia), FBI agents (whose investigations were obstructed) and covert operatives who were studiously silenced (Naval Intelligence Officer Delmart "Mike" Vreeland, for one)
Ari Fleischer's Lies About the CIA
As part of his clumsy May 15 damage control press conference, Fleischer responded to a question about CIA foreknowledge by quoting from an address given on April 11 at Duke University by CIA Deputy Director James Pavitt. Fleischer quoted only selected passages from the Pavitt address that seemed to deny 9/11 foreknowledge:
"What didn't we know? We never found the tactical intelligence, never uncovered the specifics that could have stopped those tragic strikes that we all remember so well. Against that degree of control, that kind of compartmentation, that depth of discipline and fanaticism, I personally doubt . . . that anything short of one of the knowledgeable inner circle personnel or hijackers turning himself in to us would have given us sufficient foreknowledge to have prevented the horrendous slaughter that took place. Some of you out there may have heard bin Laden himself speak about this on that shocking videotape."
But Fleischer failed to quote portions of the same speech in which Pavitt admitted CIA clear foreknowledge of the September 11th attacks, deep penetration of terrorist cells throughout Central Asia and the Middle East, and longstanding presence in the region. This speech, which is posted at the CIA web site, has already been dissected by Online Journal. Among the Pavitt passages that Fleischer did not read to the press:
"We had very, very good intelligence of the general structure and strategies of the al Qaeda terrorist organization. We knew and we warned that al Qaeda was planning a major strike. There need be no question about that."
"If you hear somebody say, and I have, the CIA abandoned Afghanistan after the Soviets left and that we never paid any attention to that place until September 11th, I would implore you to ask those people how we were able to accomplish all we did since the Soviets departed. How we knew who to approach on the ground, which operations, which warlord to support, what information to collect. Quite simply, we were there well before the 11th of September."
"We predicted, we told the President, that there would be between five and 15 serious attacks against on U.S. soil. But we did much much more than warn. With our allies and our partners around the world, we launched immense efforts to counter those threats. Hundreds of terrorists were arrested, multiple cells of terrorism were destroyed."
Indeed, according to a September 14, 2001, report from Reuters, "The CIA has been authorized since 1998 to use covert means to disrupt and pre-empt terror operations allegedly planned abroad by Saudi-born dissident Osama bin Laden." Quoting government sources, "The CIA had used such force several times to stop armed groups before they initiated attacks." As mentioned previously, the CIA participated in a study that concluded that Osama bin Laden's terrorists could hijack an airliner and fly it into government buildings. And there is more proof of CIA foreknowledge and action.
The February 2001 trial of the al-Qaeda members responsible for the 1998 US embassy bombings was based almost entirely on intercepted cell phone calls. During the trial, prosecutors describe how US intelligence used Echelon, a highly secret technical intelligence gathering system used to monitor worldwide communications. On February 13, 2001, UPI quoted multiple agencies saying that they had broken al Queda's codes.
It is inconceivable that, armed with a budget of over $30 billion, and technologies such as Echelon (which tracks nearly all electronic communication in the world), Promis (which monitors banking and financial transactions in real-time), Carnivore (which intercepts e-mail) and other tools, the CIA and other US intelligence agencies would have "no inkling."
This lie is further exposed by the fact that Mohammed Atta, the lead hijacker, had been under constant CIA surveillance since January 2000. (Source: Reuters Oct 22, 2001) According to Le Figaro (October 31, 2001), bin Laden received treatment at an American hospital in Dubai for kidney disease in mid-July 2001-and reportedly met with a CIA official.
The More Important Questions They Are Not Asking
1. Who really is Osama bin Laden? What is al Qaeda? What really is "Militant Islam?" In a penetrating analysis by Professor Michel Chossudovsky titled "Who is Osama bin Laden?" this question is answered clearly. Osama bin Laden and the terror networks of the region are creations of the United States and its CIA-and continue to serve the geostrategic purposes of the United States government, which directly and indirectly controls their operations.
The CIA, using Pakistan's ISI, played a key role in training the mujahadeen. In turn, the CIA-sponsored guerrilla training was integrated into the teachings of Islam.
Pakistan's ISI is a proxy of the CIA by official government directive.
CIA covert operations in the region are conducted through the ISI. Terror operations continue throughout the Middle East, the Caucasus, the Balkans and Central Asia-which, in addition to holding coveted untapped oil and gas reserves, produces three quarters of the world's opium.
The Islamic Jihad has been supported by the US and Saudi Arabia with a significant part of the funding generated from the Golden Crescent drug trade.
Motivated by nationalism and religious fervor, and kept out of touch with upper levels of the intelligence hierarchy, Islamic warriors are unaware of whose purposes they serve.
Since the Cold War, Washington has consciously supported Osama bin Laden, while at the same time inflating his legend as the world's foremost terrorist.
Why did the director of the ISI transfer money to Mohammed Atta, and why has no one investigated this connection?
2. Why were no fighter planes scrambled on the morning of 9/11?
With the full knowledge that four planes had been simultaneously hijacked, the National Command Authority did not scramble fighter aircraft to intercept for 75 minutes-an unprecedented breach of standard FAA procedure that has been followed for 25 years. The bizarre air stand-down has been analyzed at http://emperors-clothes.com/indict/indict-1.htm.
3. What accounts for Bush's behavior on 9/11? Bush was not 'formally' informed of the hijackings for 35 minutes -an astounding irregularity all by itself. When White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card "whispered into his ear," Bush displayed no shock and continued to speak to a classroom of schoolchildren. Later reports confirm that Bush knew about the first World Trade Center crash while in the presidential limousine on the way to the school-and he did not act. Another report quoted Bush as saying "When I saw the first plane hit, I thought 'what a terrible pilot.'" Putting aside the callousness of his thought, was this another garbled quote, or did Bush see the first plane? And if so, how did he see it? In yet another report, after both World Trade towers were hit, Bush joked to his budget director Mitch Daniels, "I've hit the trifecta." Is this the behavior of a president who just found out about the horrific "first attack of US territory since the war of 1812"? 4. If 9/11 was an unprovoked surprise terror attack, what was the Bush administration doing provoking the Taliban and threatening war with Afghanistan?
In July 2001 Pakistani Foreign Secretary Niaz Naik is told by senior US officials that military actions against Afghanistan would begin by October. This threat, which was triggered in part by the Taliban's refusal to accept the Bush administration's terms for a trans-Afghan oil pipeline, is made directly to the Taliban during a meeting in Berlin, attended by the Taliban, officials of Russia, Iran, Pakistan and the Northern Alliance. New memos reveal that Bush had an Afghanistan war plan on his desk on September 9.
5. What did Wall Street know? And if Wall Street knew, what wasn't known within the Bush administration? What wasn't known by the CIA and intelligence agencies, which track stock trades on a real time basis? The highly abnormal insider trading that occurred immediately before the 9/11 attacks involving only companies hardest hit by the attacks-UAL, American Airlines, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch and others-and were clearly the result of foreknowledge. Despite these trades, which Dylan Ratigan of Bloomberg Business News described as "insider trading at the worst, most horrific, most evil use you've ever seen . . . one of the most extraordinary coincidences in the history of mankind if it was a coincidence." To those who would place the blame on bin Laden, consider this: according to an October 6 National Public Radio report, Britain's Financial Services Authority cleared bin Laden and al Qaeda of this insider trading.
6. Why have the insiders and whistleblowers been silenced and intimidated?
In August 2001, a US Navy Lieutenant and Naval Intelligence officer, Delmart "Mike" Vreeland, who was jailed in Canada on US fraud charges, which were later proven false, repeatedly warned US and Canadian intelligence officials about the pending suicide hijack attacks (complete with the listing of targets), based on information he had gleaned from documents that he had couriered from Russia before his arrest. US and Canadian officials refused to debrief him. Vreeland, whose identity was verified in court, was cleared of all charges and is in Canada fighting extradition to the US. In light of increasing evidence of Bush administration foreknowledge, Vreeland's case, and his claims to have detailed information regarding total US intelligence penetration of al Qaeda, takes on even greater significance. His case can be studied at www.copvcia.com.
For more unasked questions, and links to articles in which the answers are fully or partially answered, www.communitycurrency.org/9-11.html.
Letting It Happen: A New Smoking Gun
On CNN Inside Politics (May 17, 2002), Senator Dianne Feinstein responded to Ari Fleischer's outrageous accusation that she did not provide the White House with information about terrorist threats. Feinstein stated that on September 10, 2001, she discussed the lack of protection against terrorist attacks against targets within the US with the staff of Vice President Dick Cheney and practically begged for some action from the administration. She was told by the Cheney staffer it would have to wait at least six months.
A Limited Hangout or Something More? The Mushrooming Scandal in Context
Since September 11, and until just days ago, the Bush empire appeared to be invincible, unchallenged and marching the world towards escalating worldwide war, and dictatorship in the United States. The Bush oligarchy appeared dominant over a sold-out and servile Congress, and a corporate consensus marching in lockstep to the orders of the administration's oil/military/intelligence hierarchy.
What has caused certain members of Congress to find a voice and a spine?
What has caused the major corporate American media, which until days ago was the most aggressive supporter of the White House version of 9/11, to turn on the Bush administration?
Who gave the orders, the signal, that is was time to go after Bush-in a way that they had not done since George W. Bush announced his candidacy for the presidency?
The answers at this early stage are not clear. But recent events suggest that
1) the rampant criminality of the administration is becoming too obvious to cover up,
2) resistance to the brute force of Bush unilateralism is becoming too great to ignore,
3) political and social instability throughout the world is becoming a problem in key strategic regions where a modicum of finesses is needed, 4) a segment of the ruling elite has grown tired of being shut out of the deal.
Consider the embarrassing failures of the Bush administration since September 11:
Despite the success of restarting the Unocal pipeline, Afghanistan remains a hotbed of warlordism and anti-US hostility that US-installed Hamid Karzai is having difficulty controlling.
Osama bin Laden has not been found. Al Qaeda has not been dismantled.
Recent talks between the US, Russia, Iran and former Soviet republics to forge a multilateral agreement regarding oil and gas in the Caspian Sea region collapsed, leaving the western oil companies in a precarious position with unrequited investments throughout the Caspian region.
Israel's American-approved and American-assisted butchery and criminal occupation of Palestine, pushed to nightmarish extremes by Ariel Sharon, has triggered outrage and anti-US hostility throughout the world. Islamic outrage is worsening.
The threat of oil embargos from OPEC nations and threats of boycotts of US goods are real.
Bush has failed to maintain multinational "coalitions"-the key to continued US military and neoliberal economic primacy.
A war against Iraq is impossible without a coalition.
The US-orchestrated coup of Venezuela failed. Evidence of the Bush administration's participation in this coup is clear, blatant, and embarrassing.
The US-led Plan Colombia/Andean Initiative is meeting with continued resistance throughout Latin America.
The world economy is floundering.
Outside of the tightly controlled US, America is hated.
Enron, Enron, Enron.
The constitutional crisis triggered by Bush's refusal to reveal documents relating to the energy task force has worsened.
A continuing grand jury investigation of corruption in Kazakhstan, implicating oil companies tied to the Bush administration.
More FBI agents are coming forward with lawsuits exposing Bush administration obstruction of anti-terror operations.
Former President Jimmy Carter's visit to Cuba was a loud rebuke to Bush, and a loud signal to the world that an opposing faction of the New World Order-one which includes prominent conservative Democrats-is a making a move. The crafty Carter, he of the Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations, was the consummate world diplomat -a stark counter to the relentless unilateral militarism of the Bush faction.
Clearly, Bush and his administration would not be under pressure unless powerful people wanted it to happen. The corporate media, which has gotten the green light to make noise, would not be engaging in a feeding frenzy without an incentive.
Is this another limited hangout? How far will this go? Is it a palace coup? Is it a "wag the dog" fake?
The Lies Will Not Stand
In the months since September 11, the defining moment of recent history, neither the Bush administration, nor its surrogates and allies, have produced one shred of credible evidence supporting the White House version of the events of that day. Instead, the Bush administration has mass marketed a total fabrication based on accusations, fear mongering, infantile comic book bluster, and duplicitous lies about US policies, geo-strategic agenda, and worldwide operations. Their evidence has amounted to the weakest conspiracy theory and, in the case of the "notorious bin Laden video" that is trotted out at the first sign of controversy, televised conspiracy fantasy.
Meanwhile, in the past eight months, hundreds of independent researchers, journalists and scholars have done what neither Congress nor the White House has done: investigate. This already substantial body of evidence is being exponentially strengthened and enhanced by new evidence coming to light in the mushrooming scandal. The points presented in this article are but the tip of the iceberg.
The courageous Ruppert has thoroughly and dispassionately examined the September 11 case. Read his powerful analyses:
The Lie Won't Stand
The Case for Bush Administration Advance Knowledge of 9-11 Attacks
"Oh Lucy! - You Gotta Lotta 'Splainin To Do"
Ruppert has dissected the events of the day, but also the geostrategic agenda preceding and following the event. The Bush version of events is utterly smashed to pieces.
A recently published and excellent collection of investigative journalism, Everything You Know Is Wrong, offers another thoroughly documented, meticulously sourced examination of 9/11 titled "September 11, 2001: No Surprise."
Given the voluminous evidence (from reliable open sources) now amassed against the Bush administration, this much is clear:
the administration of George Walker Bush cannot claim a lack of intelligence, technology or human resources capable of predicting or preventing the attacks of September 11. Nor can it disown the criminal activities and policies that preceded and followed the day, and the mass slaughter that has continued to be waged around the world in its name.
In fact, the Bush oligarchy had both the motive and the means to facilitate the most spectacular atrocity in modern American history, and open the Pandora's box of world war without end.
Bush knew. Now, the entire world knows.
It is up to the people of the world to seize this moment, and send the Bush administration into the bowels of history.
Larry Chin is a freelance journalist and an Online Journal Contributing Editor
http://www.onlinejournal.com/Special_Reports/Chin051902/chin051902.html
Email This Article
MainPage
http://www.rense.com
This Site Served by TheHostPros
_______________________
25 Reasons Why "White Collar Terrorists" Are To Blame for 9-11, "America's New War," and the Impending World War III
Compiled by Dr. Len Horowitz
http://www.americanreddoublecross.com/
1) The "terrorist" attacks were completely predictable and, in fact, predicted. Forewarnings were issued by many patriotic and heroic individuals to government and military officials well in advance of Sept. 11, 2001. For instance, in August, Drs. Garth Nicolson, Ph.D., and his wife Nancy Nicolson, Ph.D., among the world's most esteemed Mycoplasma researchers and Gulf War Syndrome investigators, reported to Pentagon officials that they had confirmed intelligence that on Sept. 11, 2001 a terrorist strike against the Pentagon would be made. Their sources included individuals in key intelligence positions, the mob, and one high level African diplomat. Their "information was passed on to the Director of Policy of the Department of Defense, the Inspector General of the US Army Medical Corps and the National Security Council," Dr. Nicolson wrote. "Unfortunately, it was ignored." Likewise, Dr. Leonard Horowitz, the award-winning author of the prophetically titled book, Death in the Air: Globalism, Terrorism and Toxic Warfare, (http://www.tetrahedron.org; http://www.prophecyandpreparedness.com/) released three months before the attacks on Washington and New York, correctly predicted such a first strike on New York. For three years, based on government documents and intelligence reports, he had been warning "Metropolis" residents, "It's time to move."
2) On Friday, September 7, Florida Governor, Jeb Bush, brother to the President, issued an Executive Order in which members of the Florida National Guard were activated, "for the purpose of training to support law-enforcement personnel and emergency-management personnel in the event of civil disturbances or natural disaster." Perhaps the president and his brother received Dr. Nicolson's warnings or were the source of the warnings?
3) Numerous reports have surfaced alleging that Bush administration, military, and intelligence officials' close associates had suddenly, and inexplicably, sold all their airline stock just days before the terrorist attacks. The F.B.I. is reportedly investigating these reports and such "inside traders."
4) Osama bin Laden and his band of "Terrorists" could not have pulled off the "sophisticated" operation of four simultaneous air hijackings, and precision directed attacks, without the support of one or more "intelligence organizations." This was the expert testimony provided by past CIA Afghanistan operations director and bin Laden's American intelligence aficionado, Milt Bearden, interviewed by Dan Rather on September 12, 2001. In fact, when pressed by Dan Rather to endorse the theory of bin Laden's culpability, Mr. Bearden stated, "if they didn't have an Osama bin Laden, they would invent one."
5) On October 31, 2001, the French daily Le Figaro reported that Osama bin Laden had met with a high-level CIA official in July 2000. At that time, bin Laden was already being sought for trial for his involvement in two U.S. embassy bombings and the U.S.S. Cole attack. The meeting was held in bin Laden's private suite in a Dubai hospital. Though he was eligible for extermination, according to President Bill Clinton's intelligence findings, on July 14th he was let go and left Dubai on his private jet.
6) Every expert in the field of terrorism, up until Sept. 11, 2001, routinely explained the fact that certified terrorist organizations operate in an effort to garner worldwide attention and support for their political cause(s). In the case of pro-Palestinian terrorist organizations, their attacks had been traditionally against American military facilities and personnel. This was obviously neither the intent nor outcome of the attacks on the World Trade Center.
7) For weeks preceding September 11, 2001 international opinion regarding Israel and the United States had plummeted to an all-time low. Alternatively, pro-Palestinian attitudes had rapidly increased to an all-time high, particularly following the United Nations Conference on Racism wherein the U.S. and Israel had been chastised for their racist policies. Any intelligent pro-Palestinian terrorist group, such as Osama bin Laden's legions, or intelligence organization(s) supportive to the Palestinian cause, would not have jeopardized the significant gains achieved at that time.
8) Osama bin Laden took his direction and money from the CIA for ten years. During this time, approximately $5 billion was funneled to his organization through black op budgets into CIA operation known as Maktab al-Khidamar-the MAK. It is clear, as a MAK mercenary army leader, bin Laden's fortune vastly increased during that time. It is said that, "Once in the CIA, always in the CIA." Could this be one of the intelligence organizations about which Milt Bearden was speaking? (See #5 above.)
9) Also on Tuesday evening September 12, 2001 previous Secretary of Defense for the Clinton administration, William S. Cohen, explained to CBS News anchorman Dan Rather, that the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington were an aberration. He fully expected there to be a full-scale deployment of biological and chemical "weapons of mass destruction" very soon. This reinforced his earlier statements as Defense Secretary that a five-pound bag of anthrax bacteria in the hands of terrorists would likely cause the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans. We were particularly vulnerable to this "immanent" threat, he said. Many critical military observers considered these statements treasonous. Reason? At no time in American military history has a top level official broadcast internationally the country's greatest attack vulnerability. In effect, his statements were akin to giving anti-Americans their marching orders.
10) A sincere U.S. Government, truly concerned about the health and safety of American citizens, would be doing everything in its power to advance public health and educational policies for biological and chemical attack preparedness. Instead, such critical policy and advice has been left entirely to independent, often ill-trained, "experts," at best, and special interests and media producers at worst. The mainstream media has completely neglected the simple things people can do to guard loved-ones, such as natural medicines (e.g.,garlic) to ward off infections such as anthrax.
11) In July 2000, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) endorsed one single largely untested and highly risky antibiotic, Bayer Corporation's Cipro, for anthrax prophylaxis and treatment. Following September 11, 2001 demand for this drug skyrocketed 1,000 percent, according to Peter Jennings in an ABC News report broadcast September 27. Pharmacies charged $700 per person for a mere two-month supply of Cipro. It is well established that far less expensive antibiotics, including the penicillins and tetracyclines, are highly effective against Anthrax. The Bayer Corporation during and following World War II had been blacklisted by the U.S. Government for being the principle profiteer, in partnership with the Rockefeller Standard Oil Company, for funding the Third Reich, their terrorist organizations, and Germany's war machine.
12) During the first week of October, the media heralded a bizarre anthrax outbreak at the National Enquirer near Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. By October 11, three cases of reported "criminal" anthrax infections had occurred. This form of anthrax--a classic biological weapon strain--is not easily acquired. It is distributed mainly by the American Type Culture Collection (ATCC) of Rockville, Maryland. The curator there is Dr. Joshua Lederberg, who is also the president of Rockefeller University. Preceding the Gulf War, the U.S. Congressional Record (May 25, 1994, commonly called the "Don Riegle Report") exposed the ATCC for shipping to Sadam Hussein's Ministry of Higher Education and the Ministry of Trade, nineteen shipments of various strains of Bacillus Anthraces from 1978 to 1988.
13) According to investigators at the FBI, the Enquirer anthrax attack was not likely done by typical "terrorists," but rather one or more "criminals." For what motive? Obviously, whoever did this had a motive, and had access to weapons grade anthrax. That virtually leaves typical blue-collar "criminals" out entirely since skill in handling and shipping live anthrax would be required for this crime. The fact that, of all places, America's bestselling tabloid was first attacked, then other mainstream media outlets, speaks volumes about the criminal motive. Since no one has claimed responsibility for this act, they obviously did not do it for personal publicity. Obviously, then, the attack was a white collar crime by one or more "white collar bioterrorist(s)." At least one Rockefeller-linked U.S. biological weapons official, Dr. Lederberg, and Rockefeller-partnered Corporation, Bayer (aspirin) that largely financed the Third Reich, and Hitler's rise to power, had obvious white-collar (financial) motives for these contemporary "terrorist" attacks. This deserves critical consideration and further investigation.
14) On October 1, 2001, Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz sent the FBI, as well as half the members of the U.S. Congress, an urgent request to investigate this matter. (See: http://www.tetrahedron.org "Apocalypse Prevention Project") Included in this letter was the following statement concerning the links between contemporary terrorist organizations, the global neo-Nazi movement, and possible Bayer Corporation involvement:
The Bayer Company [also linked to AID-virus contaminated blood products during 1980 investigations] evaded U.S. Government controls during and following the holocaust in which millions of mostly Jewish people were used as experimental subjects in medical atrocities overseen by I.G. Farben's president Hermann Schmitz, who also directed the German-multinational Bayer A.G.
Of urgent pertinence to the FBI's current investigation into terrorism's money trail, a recent investigation into terrorist group funding, issued by The Oklahoma Bombing Investigation Committee (OBIC) directed by Representative Charles Key, found "Neo-Nazi figures have actually been implicated in Middle Eastern special weapons procurement and terrorist activity." For example, the group reported, "since the 1960s, an old Swiss Nazi named Francois Genaud has reportedly masterminded several airplane hijackings for the PLO." The now defunct "Odessa" organization, the post-war successor to Hitler's S.S., according to OBIC, "had numerous documented meetings with representatives of various Arab organizations; and, during the early 1980s, a Neo-Nazi named Odfried Hepp attacked several U.S. military installations in Germany with bombs. Hepp was later found to have been financed by Al Fatah." Hepp, OBIC reported, did his Ph.D. on "Neo-Nazi/PLO bombings of U.S. housing, cars and military facilities in Germany." Given these facts alone, an FBI investigation into this matter is critical.
I am also contacting congressional leaders at this time urging an immediate U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) investigation into the FDA's "advisory committee" that sponsored the unprecedented sole endorsement of Bayer's Cipro for anthrax. Nowhere in the Physician's Desk Reference (2000) is it claimed that Cipro is especially indicated for anthrax. In fact, Bacillus anthracis is not even mentioned. What is mentioned is that, "although effective in clinical trials, ciprofloxacin is not a drug of first choice in the treatment of presumed or confirmed pneumonia secondary to Streptococcus pneumoniae." This organism, like anthrax, is an aerobic gram-positive microbe. (Likewise, Bacillus anthracis causes pneumonia in the form of commonly terminal hemorrhagic bronchopneumonia.) Furthermore the PDR states: "WARNINGS-THE SAFETY AND EFFECTIVENESS OF CIPROFLOXACIN IN PEDIATRIC PATIENTS AND ADOLESCENTS (LESS THAN 18 YEARS OF AGE), PREGNANT WOMEN, AND LACTATING WOMEN HAVE NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED." Alternatively, numerous bioweapons experts have consistently recommended far less costly and time-tested antibiotics to fight anthrax, including the natural and synthetic penicillins, erythromycin, cephalosporins, and the tetracyclines.
As with Dr. Nicolson's forewarning to military leaders concerning the Sept 11 Pentagon attack, the above urgent request by Dr. Horowitz for FBI investigation into this matter, to date (Nov. 5, 2001) has gone ignored. This strongly suggests, if not evidences, a conspiracy within our own government-a conspiracy of silence at minimum.
15) Aaron Swirski, one of the architects of the World Trade Center, said they designed the towers to withstand airplane collisions. "I designed it for a 707 hit, he said." The collapse of the buildings came as a complete "shock" to him and his colleagues. Van Romero, a demolition expert, former director of the Energetic Materials Research and Testing Center, and current vice present for research at New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology said that the manner in which the twin towers collapsed, resembled those of controlled implosions used in planned demolition. "My opinion is, based on the videotapes, that after the airplanes hit the World Trade Center there were some explosive devices inside the buildings that caused the towers to collapse," Romero said. ABC News interviewed people who had escaped "ground zero" on September 11, 2001. One unidentified man said: "We were stuck on the stairs for a while. I came down from the 85th floor. When we were just about to leave the building, there was a blast." A woman's testimony followed: "I got stuck on the stairs. When we got to the lobby there was a blast," she said.
16) On September 11, 2001 President Bush was is Sarasota, Florida, "In Sarasota, Fla. "reading to children in a classroom at 9:05 a.m. when his chief of staff, Andrew Card, whispered into his ear, according to the Associated Press (Sept. 12). The president briefly turned somber before he resumed reading. . . .[Next] President Bush listened to 18 Booker Elementary School second-
graders read a story about a girl's pet goat . . . before he spoke briefly and somberly about the terrorist attacks." Many are curious as to why the "Commander-in-Chief" of the U.S. took about a half-hour before he responded to the national security urgency, or even addressed the tragedies.
17) The New York Times reported on September 15, 2001 that Pentagon officials had been tracking the second two hijacked planes for almost an hour following the WTC attacks because they simply "didn't know what to do." Regarding the plane that crashed into Pennsylvania "Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy defense secretary, said . . . that the Pentagon had been tracking that plane and could have shot it down if necessary; it crashed about 35 minutes after the Pentagon crash." Many are wondering why, if they could have shot that plane down, did they not shoot the plane down that flew into the Pentagon?
18) Vice President Dick Cheney was interviewed on Sept. 12, 2001. When asked where he was when he learned of the attacks, many were surprised to learn that he was alerted by his secretary who was "watching television" in his Washington, D.C. office. In essence, though the FAA had known at least four planes were veering far off their course, while the Pentagon, too, had been tracking at least two of the hijacked planes, Mr. Cheney received his initial intelligence report by way of television through his clerical secretary.
19) "Drugs and terrorism go hand in hand," wrote investigative journalist and retired LAPD officer Michael C. Ruppert (http://www.copvcia.com) "Conveniently ignored in all of the press coverage since the tragic events of Sept. 11," Mr. Ruppert wrote, "is the fact that on May 17 Secretary of State Colin Powell announced a gift of $43 million to the Taliban as a purported reward for its eradication of Afghanistan's opium crop this February. That, in effect, made the U.S. the Taliban's largest financial benefactor according to syndicated columnist Robert Scheer writing in The Los Angeles Times on May 22."
20) "Now as US military action will replace the Taliban government and fresh crops will be planted in Afghanistan," Mr. Ruppert continued, "the slack in cash flow will assuredly be replaced by dramatically increased opium production in Colombia; the revenues from that effort being needed to maintain the revenue streams into Wall Street. Prior to the WTC attacks, credible sources, including the U.S. government, the IMF, Le Monde and the U.S. Senate placed the amount of drug cash flowing into Wall Street and U.S. banks at around $250-$300 billion a year."
21) Mr. Ruppert also revealed that an Executive Director at the CIA named A. "Buzzy" Krongard is suspected of Wall Street profiteering from foreknowledge of the Sept 11 attacks. Formerly with Bankers Trust catering to the world's wealthiest clients of the Deutsch Bank. (The Deutsche Bank is heavily implicated in Dr. Len Horowitz's book Death in the Air: Globalism, Terrorism, and Toxic Warfare released in June, 2001) In 1999, Mr. Krongard left Deutsch Bank for his present high-level job in the CIA. Enormous quantities of "Put" options were handled through the Deutsche Bank, which allowed the options buyers to earn profits in the event the value of airline stocks went down. The appearance of advance knowledge of Sept. 11 is so strong that to date
$2.5 Million of the $20 Million in profits earned on those unusual trades, remains unclaimed, possibly by Mr. Krongard, or other affiliates of the CIA.
22) Many journalists have reported that the bombing of Afghanistan, allegedly intended to punish the Taliban for affiliations with Bin Laden, is simply a cover for that government's reneging of support for an oil pipeline through Afghanistan from the vast Caspian Sea oil fields. Sept. 11, provided a great excuse to pursue this petrochemical, economic, and "national security" objective.
23) On December 20, 1997, the national newspaper CONTACT: The Phoenix Project, published an interview on anthrax biowarfare threats and vaccinations in which Dr. Leonard Horowitz was asked "about the government's pressure to vaccinate [using the anthrax vaccine] and the bioweapons scare tactics, etc." He responded: "Look at the motive behind the persuasion, and what is it? They're preparing to blame it on the Muslims, Christian patriots, and militia groups. The militia groups are already dysfunctional because they're penetrated by agitators."
This is precisely what followed in the wake of the 9-11 attacks. Muslim groups were blamed for the 9-11 attacks. Christian patriots were blamed for the anthrax mailings. Militia groups were entirely silenced and even implicated. And false patriotism in which Americans welcome the destruction of basic constitutional liberties with CIA command over the entire U.S. military and Government has come to pass.
24) On October 31, 2001 the American people and U.S. Constitutional freedoms were attacked, not by the Taliban government or Muslim terrorists, but by CDC officials who advanced the "Model State Emergency Health Powers Act" that will force masses of people suspected of exposure to broadly-defined "infectious diseases" and biological weapons into concentration camp-like holding facilities for drugging, vaccination, and quarantine, without any viable legal recourse.
25) The entire 9-11 tragedy and subsequent threats to U.S. national and global securities fits far too perfectly with standard Machiavellian theory to be overlooked. This ongoing practice-the "problem/reaction/solution" agenda of precisely "managed chaos"-appears to be standard operating procedures for oligarchs historically bend on developing a "New World Order." Sadly now for the American people, as it has been for the Third World, this effort includes killing approximately half of the world's current population.
For more information, review the following websites:
http://www.tetrahedron.org/
http://www.prophecyandpreparedness.com/
http://www.copvcia.com/
http://www.davidicke.com/icke/index1a.html
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO109C.html
Courtesy of Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz
and Tetrahedron, LLC
206 North 4th Avenue, Suite 147
Sandpoint, Idaho 83864
http://www.tetrahedron.org/
Toll free order line: 888-508-4787;
Office telephone: 208-265-2575;
FAX: 208-265-2775
E-mail: tetra@tetrahedron.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rense.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bush Knew...And Now
The Entire World Knows
By Larry Chin
Online Journal Contributing Editor
5-21-2
All the desperate lies and spin don't change the fact that the Bush administration had foreknowledge of the Sept. 11 attacks...
George W. Bush knew. And his administration knew. The transparently dishonest denials issued by the White House do not stand up to the slightest scrutiny. They are lying. A simple examination of existing information, gathered from reliable, open sources proves it. Last night, Michael C. Ruppert of From The Wilderness was scheduled to present his case for Bush 9/11 foreknowledge before a national TV audience on Geraldo Rivera's Fox News program. At the last minutes, this live appearance was cancelled. Coincidence? Ruppert's appearance, which could have caused immeasurable damage to the administration, was allegedly prompted by "breaking news" from the White House suggesting "imminent new terrorist attacks." "Wag the dog"? What desperate measures will this cabal resort to in order to remain in power? How many more lives will they take?
Backed into a Corner at Every Turn
On May 15, Press Secretary and official White House liar Ari Fleischer nervously stuttered, "The president did not receive information about the use of airplanes as missiles by suicide bombers. This was a new type of attack that was not foreseen."
This was followed by Condoleeza Rice, who repeated the spin: "I don't think that anyone could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center." Bush himself issued a statement that he had no indication beforehand that "terrorists would hijack jets and deliberately crash them." The White House would have us believe that not a single individual in the entire US government, nor the entire Central Intelligence Agency, had knowledge about a method of terrorism that has been routine for more than 20 years. And that not a single person in the entire national security apparatus of the US had a shred of information on training camps in Iran (a hotspot of intense US intelligence focus for decades) devoted to this method of terrorism.
Yossef Bodansky is a director of the Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare in the US House of Representatives, and the author of the book "Bin Laden: The Man Who Targeted America." Bodansky is a Washington insider whose views are sought after, respected and broadly disseminated throughout the US government.
In a well-publicized paper from 1993, he stated, "The training of suicide pilots started in the Busher air base in Iran in the early 1980s with some 90 Pilatus PC-7 aircraft purchased from Switzerland." "According to a former trainee in Wakilibad (a base for the training of kamikaze pilots), one of the exercises included having an Islamic Jihad detachment seize (or hijack) a transport aircraft. Then trained air crews from among the terrorists would crash the airliner with its passengers into a selected objective," he wrote.
"The leading terrorists are known as 'Afghans,' having been trained with the mujahadeen in Pakistan. Some fought in Afghanistan. Muslim volunteers from several Arab and Asian countries were encouraged to come to Pakistan and join the Afghan Jihad." (Source: Target America: Terrorism in the US Today, 1993. "Islamic Terrorism in the United States," National Security Caucus, 1996.)
The Bush administration would have us believe that a subject that was written about in books and discussed openly throughout Washington is "unimaginable."
They would also have us believe that they, and their intelligence operatives, have been unaware of some of the most spectacular and horrific terrorist operations in recent history-many of them directed at the United States.
Yet:
On December 29, 1994, four terrorists alleged to have ties to Osama bin Laden hijacked Air France Flight 8969, a flight from Algiers to Paris. They loaded the plane with explosives and filled it with extra fuel, with the intent of ramming it into the Eiffel Tower. Commandos stormed the plane and killed the hijackers. (Source: NBC News. September 30, 2001. Chris Hansen, "The Lesson of Air France Flight 8969")
A full seven years before September 11, an al-Qaeda suicide hijacking is partially executed and barely stopped by French intelligence. The Bush administration would have us believe that no one in the CIA had ever heard of such a thing.
Another suicide hijacking plot was discovered six years before September 11. Ramsey Youssef, the terrorist who masterminded the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center had detailed plans to hijack and crash commercial airliners into buildings in the US, and blow up 12 US airliners during international flights over a two-day period. This plot, known as Operation Bojinka, was discovered by Philippine intelligence agents in 1995, in the hideout of Yousef and Abdul Hakim Murad, a US trained pilot linked to bin Laden. Philippine authorities passed this information to the FBI. This plot was disclosed again in the 1997 trial of Youssef. (Source: Kevin Cullen, Ralph Ranalli. Boston Globe, Sept 18, 2001, "Flight School Said FBI Trailed Suspect Prior to Hijackings")
Two years before 9/11, reports prepared for U.S. intelligence warned that Osama bin Laden would hijack an airliner and fly it into government buildings like the Pentagon. "Suicide bomber(s) belonging to al-Qaeda's Martyrdom Battalion could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives (C-4 and semtex) into the Pentagon, the headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or the White House,'' the September 1999 report said. (Source: Associated Press, May 17, 2002).
In July 2001, during the G8 Summit in Genoa, Italy, Deputy Prime Minister Gianfranco Fini revealed that Italian intelligence had uncovered a plot to crash a hijacked commercial airliner into either Air Force One or one of the buildings used for the summit. (Source: New York Newsday, Sept 19, 2001) This jetliner kamikaze plot was directed at Bush himself. Taking the Bush denial to its logical extension, the White House would have us believe that Bush and the CIA were not only unaware of this plot, but also not warned by the Italian government.
During the investigation into the 1998 US embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, intelligence officials and FBI were alerted that two bin Laden associates had been trained as pilots. Airman Flight School in Oklahoma became the focus of an FBI investigation. The FBI was warned in August 2001 that Zacarias Moussauoi, the notorious "20th pilot" who attended Airman was only interested in steering a plane-and not taking off or landing. He also specifically asked about New York City air space.
In June 2001, the German BND warned the CIA and Israel of plans by Middle Eastern terrorists to "hijack commercial aircraft to use as weapons to attack important symbols of American and Israeli culture." Furthermore, according to the same source, the Echelon spy network was used to break this news, and that intelligence agents in the UK also had advance warning. (Source: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, September 14, 2001)
In the summer of 2001, Russian intelligence and President Vladimir Putin warned the CIA that 25 terrorist pilots were going to hijack commercial aircraft for suicide missions.
Attorney David Shippers, who led the impeachment case against Bill Clinton, warned Attorney General John Ashcroft and Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert that he had proof from a credible source (that he has still not revealed) about a plot to use hijacked commercial airliners to ram the White House and Capitol. (Source: Info Wars (radio program) Oct 10 2001)
This list of specific warnings about suicide hijackings is but the tip of the iceberg. The Bush administration received many more warnings of an imminent attack from foreign governments (Israel, Germany, Egypt, UK, Russia), FBI agents (whose investigations were obstructed) and covert operatives who were studiously silenced (Naval Intelligence Officer Delmart "Mike" Vreeland, for one)
Ari Fleischer's Lies About the CIA
As part of his clumsy May 15 damage control press conference, Fleischer responded to a question about CIA foreknowledge by quoting from an address given on April 11 at Duke University by CIA Deputy Director James Pavitt. Fleischer quoted only selected passages from the Pavitt address that seemed to deny 9/11 foreknowledge:
"What didn't we know? We never found the tactical intelligence, never uncovered the specifics that could have stopped those tragic strikes that we all remember so well. Against that degree of control, that kind of compartmentation, that depth of discipline and fanaticism, I personally doubt . . . that anything short of one of the knowledgeable inner circle personnel or hijackers turning himself in to us would have given us sufficient foreknowledge to have prevented the horrendous slaughter that took place. Some of you out there may have heard bin Laden himself speak about this on that shocking videotape."
But Fleischer failed to quote portions of the same speech in which Pavitt admitted CIA clear foreknowledge of the September 11th attacks, deep penetration of terrorist cells throughout Central Asia and the Middle East, and longstanding presence in the region. This speech, which is posted at the CIA web site, has already been dissected by Online Journal. Among the Pavitt passages that Fleischer did not read to the press:
"We had very, very good intelligence of the general structure and strategies of the al Qaeda terrorist organization. We knew and we warned that al Qaeda was planning a major strike. There need be no question about that."
"If you hear somebody say, and I have, the CIA abandoned Afghanistan after the Soviets left and that we never paid any attention to that place until September 11th, I would implore you to ask those people how we were able to accomplish all we did since the Soviets departed. How we knew who to approach on the ground, which operations, which warlord to support, what information to collect. Quite simply, we were there well before the 11th of September."
"We predicted, we told the President, that there would be between five and 15 serious attacks against on U.S. soil. But we did much much more than warn. With our allies and our partners around the world, we launched immense efforts to counter those threats. Hundreds of terrorists were arrested, multiple cells of terrorism were destroyed."
Indeed, according to a September 14, 2001, report from Reuters, "The CIA has been authorized since 1998 to use covert means to disrupt and pre-empt terror operations allegedly planned abroad by Saudi-born dissident Osama bin Laden." Quoting government sources, "The CIA had used such force several times to stop armed groups before they initiated attacks." As mentioned previously, the CIA participated in a study that concluded that Osama bin Laden's terrorists could hijack an airliner and fly it into government buildings. And there is more proof of CIA foreknowledge and action.
The February 2001 trial of the al-Qaeda members responsible for the 1998 US embassy bombings was based almost entirely on intercepted cell phone calls. During the trial, prosecutors describe how US intelligence used Echelon, a highly secret technical intelligence gathering system used to monitor worldwide communications. On February 13, 2001, UPI quoted multiple agencies saying that they had broken al Queda's codes.
It is inconceivable that, armed with a budget of over $30 billion, and technologies such as Echelon (which tracks nearly all electronic communication in the world), Promis (which monitors banking and financial transactions in real-time), Carnivore (which intercepts e-mail) and other tools, the CIA and other US intelligence agencies would have "no inkling."
This lie is further exposed by the fact that Mohammed Atta, the lead hijacker, had been under constant CIA surveillance since January 2000. (Source: Reuters Oct 22, 2001) According to Le Figaro (October 31, 2001), bin Laden received treatment at an American hospital in Dubai for kidney disease in mid-July 2001-and reportedly met with a CIA official.
The More Important Questions They Are Not Asking
1. Who really is Osama bin Laden? What is al Qaeda? What really is "Militant Islam?" In a penetrating analysis by Professor Michel Chossudovsky titled "Who is Osama bin Laden?" this question is answered clearly. Osama bin Laden and the terror networks of the region are creations of the United States and its CIA-and continue to serve the geostrategic purposes of the United States government, which directly and indirectly controls their operations.
The CIA, using Pakistan's ISI, played a key role in training the mujahadeen. In turn, the CIA-sponsored guerrilla training was integrated into the teachings of Islam.
Pakistan's ISI is a proxy of the CIA by official government directive.
CIA covert operations in the region are conducted through the ISI. Terror operations continue throughout the Middle East, the Caucasus, the Balkans and Central Asia-which, in addition to holding coveted untapped oil and gas reserves, produces three quarters of the world's opium.
The Islamic Jihad has been supported by the US and Saudi Arabia with a significant part of the funding generated from the Golden Crescent drug trade.
Motivated by nationalism and religious fervor, and kept out of touch with upper levels of the intelligence hierarchy, Islamic warriors are unaware of whose purposes they serve.
Since the Cold War, Washington has consciously supported Osama bin Laden, while at the same time inflating his legend as the world's foremost terrorist.
Why did the director of the ISI transfer money to Mohammed Atta, and why has no one investigated this connection?
2. Why were no fighter planes scrambled on the morning of 9/11?
With the full knowledge that four planes had been simultaneously hijacked, the National Command Authority did not scramble fighter aircraft to intercept for 75 minutes-an unprecedented breach of standard FAA procedure that has been followed for 25 years. The bizarre air stand-down has been analyzed at http://emperors-clothes.com/indict/indict-1.htm.
3. What accounts for Bush's behavior on 9/11? Bush was not 'formally' informed of the hijackings for 35 minutes -an astounding irregularity all by itself. When White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card "whispered into his ear," Bush displayed no shock and continued to speak to a classroom of schoolchildren. Later reports confirm that Bush knew about the first World Trade Center crash while in the presidential limousine on the way to the school-and he did not act. Another report quoted Bush as saying "When I saw the first plane hit, I thought 'what a terrible pilot.'" Putting aside the callousness of his thought, was this another garbled quote, or did Bush see the first plane? And if so, how did he see it? In yet another report, after both World Trade towers were hit, Bush joked to his budget director Mitch Daniels, "I've hit the trifecta." Is this the behavior of a president who just found out about the horrific "first attack of US territory since the war of 1812"? 4. If 9/11 was an unprovoked surprise terror attack, what was the Bush administration doing provoking the Taliban and threatening war with Afghanistan?
In July 2001 Pakistani Foreign Secretary Niaz Naik is told by senior US officials that military actions against Afghanistan would begin by October. This threat, which was triggered in part by the Taliban's refusal to accept the Bush administration's terms for a trans-Afghan oil pipeline, is made directly to the Taliban during a meeting in Berlin, attended by the Taliban, officials of Russia, Iran, Pakistan and the Northern Alliance. New memos reveal that Bush had an Afghanistan war plan on his desk on September 9.
5. What did Wall Street know? And if Wall Street knew, what wasn't known within the Bush administration? What wasn't known by the CIA and intelligence agencies, which track stock trades on a real time basis? The highly abnormal insider trading that occurred immediately before the 9/11 attacks involving only companies hardest hit by the attacks-UAL, American Airlines, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch and others-and were clearly the result of foreknowledge. Despite these trades, which Dylan Ratigan of Bloomberg Business News described as "insider trading at the worst, most horrific, most evil use you've ever seen . . . one of the most extraordinary coincidences in the history of mankind if it was a coincidence." To those who would place the blame on bin Laden, consider this: according to an October 6 National Public Radio report, Britain's Financial Services Authority cleared bin Laden and al Qaeda of this insider trading.
6. Why have the insiders and whistleblowers been silenced and intimidated?
In August 2001, a US Navy Lieutenant and Naval Intelligence officer, Delmart "Mike" Vreeland, who was jailed in Canada on US fraud charges, which were later proven false, repeatedly warned US and Canadian intelligence officials about the pending suicide hijack attacks (complete with the listing of targets), based on information he had gleaned from documents that he had couriered from Russia before his arrest. US and Canadian officials refused to debrief him. Vreeland, whose identity was verified in court, was cleared of all charges and is in Canada fighting extradition to the US. In light of increasing evidence of Bush administration foreknowledge, Vreeland's case, and his claims to have detailed information regarding total US intelligence penetration of al Qaeda, takes on even greater significance. His case can be studied at www.copvcia.com.
For more unasked questions, and links to articles in which the answers are fully or partially answered, www.communitycurrency.org/9-11.html.
Letting It Happen: A New Smoking Gun
On CNN Inside Politics (May 17, 2002), Senator Dianne Feinstein responded to Ari Fleischer's outrageous accusation that she did not provide the White House with information about terrorist threats. Feinstein stated that on September 10, 2001, she discussed the lack of protection against terrorist attacks against targets within the US with the staff of Vice President Dick Cheney and practically begged for some action from the administration. She was told by the Cheney staffer it would have to wait at least six months.
A Limited Hangout or Something More? The Mushrooming Scandal in Context
Since September 11, and until just days ago, the Bush empire appeared to be invincible, unchallenged and marching the world towards escalating worldwide war, and dictatorship in the United States. The Bush oligarchy appeared dominant over a sold-out and servile Congress, and a corporate consensus marching in lockstep to the orders of the administration's oil/military/intelligence hierarchy.
What has caused certain members of Congress to find a voice and a spine?
What has caused the major corporate American media, which until days ago was the most aggressive supporter of the White House version of 9/11, to turn on the Bush administration?
Who gave the orders, the signal, that is was time to go after Bush-in a way that they had not done since George W. Bush announced his candidacy for the presidency?
The answers at this early stage are not clear. But recent events suggest that
1) the rampant criminality of the administration is becoming too obvious to cover up,
2) resistance to the brute force of Bush unilateralism is becoming too great to ignore,
3) political and social instability throughout the world is becoming a problem in key strategic regions where a modicum of finesses is needed, 4) a segment of the ruling elite has grown tired of being shut out of the deal.
Consider the embarrassing failures of the Bush administration since September 11:
Despite the success of restarting the Unocal pipeline, Afghanistan remains a hotbed of warlordism and anti-US hostility that US-installed Hamid Karzai is having difficulty controlling.
Osama bin Laden has not been found. Al Qaeda has not been dismantled.
Recent talks between the US, Russia, Iran and former Soviet republics to forge a multilateral agreement regarding oil and gas in the Caspian Sea region collapsed, leaving the western oil companies in a precarious position with unrequited investments throughout the Caspian region.
Israel's American-approved and American-assisted butchery and criminal occupation of Palestine, pushed to nightmarish extremes by Ariel Sharon, has triggered outrage and anti-US hostility throughout the world. Islamic outrage is worsening.
The threat of oil embargos from OPEC nations and threats of boycotts of US goods are real.
Bush has failed to maintain multinational "coalitions"-the key to continued US military and neoliberal economic primacy.
A war against Iraq is impossible without a coalition.
The US-orchestrated coup of Venezuela failed. Evidence of the Bush administration's participation in this coup is clear, blatant, and embarrassing.
The US-led Plan Colombia/Andean Initiative is meeting with continued resistance throughout Latin America.
The world economy is floundering.
Outside of the tightly controlled US, America is hated.
Enron, Enron, Enron.
The constitutional crisis triggered by Bush's refusal to reveal documents relating to the energy task force has worsened.
A continuing grand jury investigation of corruption in Kazakhstan, implicating oil companies tied to the Bush administration.
More FBI agents are coming forward with lawsuits exposing Bush administration obstruction of anti-terror operations.
Former President Jimmy Carter's visit to Cuba was a loud rebuke to Bush, and a loud signal to the world that an opposing faction of the New World Order-one which includes prominent conservative Democrats-is a making a move. The crafty Carter, he of the Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations, was the consummate world diplomat -a stark counter to the relentless unilateral militarism of the Bush faction.
Clearly, Bush and his administration would not be under pressure unless powerful people wanted it to happen. The corporate media, which has gotten the green light to make noise, would not be engaging in a feeding frenzy without an incentive.
Is this another limited hangout? How far will this go? Is it a palace coup? Is it a "wag the dog" fake?
The Lies Will Not Stand
In the months since September 11, the defining moment of recent history, neither the Bush administration, nor its surrogates and allies, have produced one shred of credible evidence supporting the White House version of the events of that day. Instead, the Bush administration has mass marketed a total fabrication based on accusations, fear mongering, infantile comic book bluster, and duplicitous lies about US policies, geo-strategic agenda, and worldwide operations. Their evidence has amounted to the weakest conspiracy theory and, in the case of the "notorious bin Laden video" that is trotted out at the first sign of controversy, televised conspiracy fantasy.
Meanwhile, in the past eight months, hundreds of independent researchers, journalists and scholars have done what neither Congress nor the White House has done: investigate. This already substantial body of evidence is being exponentially strengthened and enhanced by new evidence coming to light in the mushrooming scandal. The points presented in this article are but the tip of the iceberg.
The courageous Ruppert has thoroughly and dispassionately examined the September 11 case. Read his powerful analyses:
The Lie Won't Stand
The Case for Bush Administration Advance Knowledge of 9-11 Attacks
"Oh Lucy! - You Gotta Lotta 'Splainin To Do"
Ruppert has dissected the events of the day, but also the geostrategic agenda preceding and following the event. The Bush version of events is utterly smashed to pieces.
A recently published and excellent collection of investigative journalism, Everything You Know Is Wrong, offers another thoroughly documented, meticulously sourced examination of 9/11 titled "September 11, 2001: No Surprise."
Given the voluminous evidence (from reliable open sources) now amassed against the Bush administration, this much is clear:
the administration of George Walker Bush cannot claim a lack of intelligence, technology or human resources capable of predicting or preventing the attacks of September 11. Nor can it disown the criminal activities and policies that preceded and followed the day, and the mass slaughter that has continued to be waged around the world in its name.
In fact, the Bush oligarchy had both the motive and the means to facilitate the most spectacular atrocity in modern American history, and open the Pandora's box of world war without end.
Bush knew. Now, the entire world knows.
It is up to the people of the world to seize this moment, and send the Bush administration into the bowels of history.
Larry Chin is a freelance journalist and an Online Journal Contributing Editor
http://www.onlinejournal.com/Special_Reports/Chin051902/chin051902.html
Email This Article
MainPage
http://www.rense.com
This Site Served by TheHostPros
_______________________
25 Reasons Why "White Collar Terrorists" Are To Blame for 9-11, "America's New War," and the Impending World War III
Compiled by Dr. Len Horowitz
http://www.americanreddoublecross.com/
1) The "terrorist" attacks were completely predictable and, in fact, predicted. Forewarnings were issued by many patriotic and heroic individuals to government and military officials well in advance of Sept. 11, 2001. For instance, in August, Drs. Garth Nicolson, Ph.D., and his wife Nancy Nicolson, Ph.D., among the world's most esteemed Mycoplasma researchers and Gulf War Syndrome investigators, reported to Pentagon officials that they had confirmed intelligence that on Sept. 11, 2001 a terrorist strike against the Pentagon would be made. Their sources included individuals in key intelligence positions, the mob, and one high level African diplomat. Their "information was passed on to the Director of Policy of the Department of Defense, the Inspector General of the US Army Medical Corps and the National Security Council," Dr. Nicolson wrote. "Unfortunately, it was ignored." Likewise, Dr. Leonard Horowitz, the award-winning author of the prophetically titled book, Death in the Air: Globalism, Terrorism and Toxic Warfare, (http://www.tetrahedron.org; http://www.prophecyandpreparedness.com/) released three months before the attacks on Washington and New York, correctly predicted such a first strike on New York. For three years, based on government documents and intelligence reports, he had been warning "Metropolis" residents, "It's time to move."
2) On Friday, September 7, Florida Governor, Jeb Bush, brother to the President, issued an Executive Order in which members of the Florida National Guard were activated, "for the purpose of training to support law-enforcement personnel and emergency-management personnel in the event of civil disturbances or natural disaster." Perhaps the president and his brother received Dr. Nicolson's warnings or were the source of the warnings?
3) Numerous reports have surfaced alleging that Bush administration, military, and intelligence officials' close associates had suddenly, and inexplicably, sold all their airline stock just days before the terrorist attacks. The F.B.I. is reportedly investigating these reports and such "inside traders."
4) Osama bin Laden and his band of "Terrorists" could not have pulled off the "sophisticated" operation of four simultaneous air hijackings, and precision directed attacks, without the support of one or more "intelligence organizations." This was the expert testimony provided by past CIA Afghanistan operations director and bin Laden's American intelligence aficionado, Milt Bearden, interviewed by Dan Rather on September 12, 2001. In fact, when pressed by Dan Rather to endorse the theory of bin Laden's culpability, Mr. Bearden stated, "if they didn't have an Osama bin Laden, they would invent one."
5) On October 31, 2001, the French daily Le Figaro reported that Osama bin Laden had met with a high-level CIA official in July 2000. At that time, bin Laden was already being sought for trial for his involvement in two U.S. embassy bombings and the U.S.S. Cole attack. The meeting was held in bin Laden's private suite in a Dubai hospital. Though he was eligible for extermination, according to President Bill Clinton's intelligence findings, on July 14th he was let go and left Dubai on his private jet.
6) Every expert in the field of terrorism, up until Sept. 11, 2001, routinely explained the fact that certified terrorist organizations operate in an effort to garner worldwide attention and support for their political cause(s). In the case of pro-Palestinian terrorist organizations, their attacks had been traditionally against American military facilities and personnel. This was obviously neither the intent nor outcome of the attacks on the World Trade Center.
7) For weeks preceding September 11, 2001 international opinion regarding Israel and the United States had plummeted to an all-time low. Alternatively, pro-Palestinian attitudes had rapidly increased to an all-time high, particularly following the United Nations Conference on Racism wherein the U.S. and Israel had been chastised for their racist policies. Any intelligent pro-Palestinian terrorist group, such as Osama bin Laden's legions, or intelligence organization(s) supportive to the Palestinian cause, would not have jeopardized the significant gains achieved at that time.
8) Osama bin Laden took his direction and money from the CIA for ten years. During this time, approximately $5 billion was funneled to his organization through black op budgets into CIA operation known as Maktab al-Khidamar-the MAK. It is clear, as a MAK mercenary army leader, bin Laden's fortune vastly increased during that time. It is said that, "Once in the CIA, always in the CIA." Could this be one of the intelligence organizations about which Milt Bearden was speaking? (See #5 above.)
9) Also on Tuesday evening September 12, 2001 previous Secretary of Defense for the Clinton administration, William S. Cohen, explained to CBS News anchorman Dan Rather, that the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington were an aberration. He fully expected there to be a full-scale deployment of biological and chemical "weapons of mass destruction" very soon. This reinforced his earlier statements as Defense Secretary that a five-pound bag of anthrax bacteria in the hands of terrorists would likely cause the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans. We were particularly vulnerable to this "immanent" threat, he said. Many critical military observers considered these statements treasonous. Reason? At no time in American military history has a top level official broadcast internationally the country's greatest attack vulnerability. In effect, his statements were akin to giving anti-Americans their marching orders.
10) A sincere U.S. Government, truly concerned about the health and safety of American citizens, would be doing everything in its power to advance public health and educational policies for biological and chemical attack preparedness. Instead, such critical policy and advice has been left entirely to independent, often ill-trained, "experts," at best, and special interests and media producers at worst. The mainstream media has completely neglected the simple things people can do to guard loved-ones, such as natural medicines (e.g.,garlic) to ward off infections such as anthrax.
11) In July 2000, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) endorsed one single largely untested and highly risky antibiotic, Bayer Corporation's Cipro, for anthrax prophylaxis and treatment. Following September 11, 2001 demand for this drug skyrocketed 1,000 percent, according to Peter Jennings in an ABC News report broadcast September 27. Pharmacies charged $700 per person for a mere two-month supply of Cipro. It is well established that far less expensive antibiotics, including the penicillins and tetracyclines, are highly effective against Anthrax. The Bayer Corporation during and following World War II had been blacklisted by the U.S. Government for being the principle profiteer, in partnership with the Rockefeller Standard Oil Company, for funding the Third Reich, their terrorist organizations, and Germany's war machine.
12) During the first week of October, the media heralded a bizarre anthrax outbreak at the National Enquirer near Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. By October 11, three cases of reported "criminal" anthrax infections had occurred. This form of anthrax--a classic biological weapon strain--is not easily acquired. It is distributed mainly by the American Type Culture Collection (ATCC) of Rockville, Maryland. The curator there is Dr. Joshua Lederberg, who is also the president of Rockefeller University. Preceding the Gulf War, the U.S. Congressional Record (May 25, 1994, commonly called the "Don Riegle Report") exposed the ATCC for shipping to Sadam Hussein's Ministry of Higher Education and the Ministry of Trade, nineteen shipments of various strains of Bacillus Anthraces from 1978 to 1988.
13) According to investigators at the FBI, the Enquirer anthrax attack was not likely done by typical "terrorists," but rather one or more "criminals." For what motive? Obviously, whoever did this had a motive, and had access to weapons grade anthrax. That virtually leaves typical blue-collar "criminals" out entirely since skill in handling and shipping live anthrax would be required for this crime. The fact that, of all places, America's bestselling tabloid was first attacked, then other mainstream media outlets, speaks volumes about the criminal motive. Since no one has claimed responsibility for this act, they obviously did not do it for personal publicity. Obviously, then, the attack was a white collar crime by one or more "white collar bioterrorist(s)." At least one Rockefeller-linked U.S. biological weapons official, Dr. Lederberg, and Rockefeller-partnered Corporation, Bayer (aspirin) that largely financed the Third Reich, and Hitler's rise to power, had obvious white-collar (financial) motives for these contemporary "terrorist" attacks. This deserves critical consideration and further investigation.
14) On October 1, 2001, Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz sent the FBI, as well as half the members of the U.S. Congress, an urgent request to investigate this matter. (See: http://www.tetrahedron.org "Apocalypse Prevention Project") Included in this letter was the following statement concerning the links between contemporary terrorist organizations, the global neo-Nazi movement, and possible Bayer Corporation involvement:
The Bayer Company [also linked to AID-virus contaminated blood products during 1980 investigations] evaded U.S. Government controls during and following the holocaust in which millions of mostly Jewish people were used as experimental subjects in medical atrocities overseen by I.G. Farben's president Hermann Schmitz, who also directed the German-multinational Bayer A.G.
Of urgent pertinence to the FBI's current investigation into terrorism's money trail, a recent investigation into terrorist group funding, issued by The Oklahoma Bombing Investigation Committee (OBIC) directed by Representative Charles Key, found "Neo-Nazi figures have actually been implicated in Middle Eastern special weapons procurement and terrorist activity." For example, the group reported, "since the 1960s, an old Swiss Nazi named Francois Genaud has reportedly masterminded several airplane hijackings for the PLO." The now defunct "Odessa" organization, the post-war successor to Hitler's S.S., according to OBIC, "had numerous documented meetings with representatives of various Arab organizations; and, during the early 1980s, a Neo-Nazi named Odfried Hepp attacked several U.S. military installations in Germany with bombs. Hepp was later found to have been financed by Al Fatah." Hepp, OBIC reported, did his Ph.D. on "Neo-Nazi/PLO bombings of U.S. housing, cars and military facilities in Germany." Given these facts alone, an FBI investigation into this matter is critical.
I am also contacting congressional leaders at this time urging an immediate U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) investigation into the FDA's "advisory committee" that sponsored the unprecedented sole endorsement of Bayer's Cipro for anthrax. Nowhere in the Physician's Desk Reference (2000) is it claimed that Cipro is especially indicated for anthrax. In fact, Bacillus anthracis is not even mentioned. What is mentioned is that, "although effective in clinical trials, ciprofloxacin is not a drug of first choice in the treatment of presumed or confirmed pneumonia secondary to Streptococcus pneumoniae." This organism, like anthrax, is an aerobic gram-positive microbe. (Likewise, Bacillus anthracis causes pneumonia in the form of commonly terminal hemorrhagic bronchopneumonia.) Furthermore the PDR states: "WARNINGS-THE SAFETY AND EFFECTIVENESS OF CIPROFLOXACIN IN PEDIATRIC PATIENTS AND ADOLESCENTS (LESS THAN 18 YEARS OF AGE), PREGNANT WOMEN, AND LACTATING WOMEN HAVE NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED." Alternatively, numerous bioweapons experts have consistently recommended far less costly and time-tested antibiotics to fight anthrax, including the natural and synthetic penicillins, erythromycin, cephalosporins, and the tetracyclines.
As with Dr. Nicolson's forewarning to military leaders concerning the Sept 11 Pentagon attack, the above urgent request by Dr. Horowitz for FBI investigation into this matter, to date (Nov. 5, 2001) has gone ignored. This strongly suggests, if not evidences, a conspiracy within our own government-a conspiracy of silence at minimum.
15) Aaron Swirski, one of the architects of the World Trade Center, said they designed the towers to withstand airplane collisions. "I designed it for a 707 hit, he said." The collapse of the buildings came as a complete "shock" to him and his colleagues. Van Romero, a demolition expert, former director of the Energetic Materials Research and Testing Center, and current vice present for research at New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology said that the manner in which the twin towers collapsed, resembled those of controlled implosions used in planned demolition. "My opinion is, based on the videotapes, that after the airplanes hit the World Trade Center there were some explosive devices inside the buildings that caused the towers to collapse," Romero said. ABC News interviewed people who had escaped "ground zero" on September 11, 2001. One unidentified man said: "We were stuck on the stairs for a while. I came down from the 85th floor. When we were just about to leave the building, there was a blast." A woman's testimony followed: "I got stuck on the stairs. When we got to the lobby there was a blast," she said.
16) On September 11, 2001 President Bush was is Sarasota, Florida, "In Sarasota, Fla. "reading to children in a classroom at 9:05 a.m. when his chief of staff, Andrew Card, whispered into his ear, according to the Associated Press (Sept. 12). The president briefly turned somber before he resumed reading. . . .[Next] President Bush listened to 18 Booker Elementary School second-
graders read a story about a girl's pet goat . . . before he spoke briefly and somberly about the terrorist attacks." Many are curious as to why the "Commander-in-Chief" of the U.S. took about a half-hour before he responded to the national security urgency, or even addressed the tragedies.
17) The New York Times reported on September 15, 2001 that Pentagon officials had been tracking the second two hijacked planes for almost an hour following the WTC attacks because they simply "didn't know what to do." Regarding the plane that crashed into Pennsylvania "Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy defense secretary, said . . . that the Pentagon had been tracking that plane and could have shot it down if necessary; it crashed about 35 minutes after the Pentagon crash." Many are wondering why, if they could have shot that plane down, did they not shoot the plane down that flew into the Pentagon?
18) Vice President Dick Cheney was interviewed on Sept. 12, 2001. When asked where he was when he learned of the attacks, many were surprised to learn that he was alerted by his secretary who was "watching television" in his Washington, D.C. office. In essence, though the FAA had known at least four planes were veering far off their course, while the Pentagon, too, had been tracking at least two of the hijacked planes, Mr. Cheney received his initial intelligence report by way of television through his clerical secretary.
19) "Drugs and terrorism go hand in hand," wrote investigative journalist and retired LAPD officer Michael C. Ruppert (http://www.copvcia.com) "Conveniently ignored in all of the press coverage since the tragic events of Sept. 11," Mr. Ruppert wrote, "is the fact that on May 17 Secretary of State Colin Powell announced a gift of $43 million to the Taliban as a purported reward for its eradication of Afghanistan's opium crop this February. That, in effect, made the U.S. the Taliban's largest financial benefactor according to syndicated columnist Robert Scheer writing in The Los Angeles Times on May 22."
20) "Now as US military action will replace the Taliban government and fresh crops will be planted in Afghanistan," Mr. Ruppert continued, "the slack in cash flow will assuredly be replaced by dramatically increased opium production in Colombia; the revenues from that effort being needed to maintain the revenue streams into Wall Street. Prior to the WTC attacks, credible sources, including the U.S. government, the IMF, Le Monde and the U.S. Senate placed the amount of drug cash flowing into Wall Street and U.S. banks at around $250-$300 billion a year."
21) Mr. Ruppert also revealed that an Executive Director at the CIA named A. "Buzzy" Krongard is suspected of Wall Street profiteering from foreknowledge of the Sept 11 attacks. Formerly with Bankers Trust catering to the world's wealthiest clients of the Deutsch Bank. (The Deutsche Bank is heavily implicated in Dr. Len Horowitz's book Death in the Air: Globalism, Terrorism, and Toxic Warfare released in June, 2001) In 1999, Mr. Krongard left Deutsch Bank for his present high-level job in the CIA. Enormous quantities of "Put" options were handled through the Deutsche Bank, which allowed the options buyers to earn profits in the event the value of airline stocks went down. The appearance of advance knowledge of Sept. 11 is so strong that to date
$2.5 Million of the $20 Million in profits earned on those unusual trades, remains unclaimed, possibly by Mr. Krongard, or other affiliates of the CIA.
22) Many journalists have reported that the bombing of Afghanistan, allegedly intended to punish the Taliban for affiliations with Bin Laden, is simply a cover for that government's reneging of support for an oil pipeline through Afghanistan from the vast Caspian Sea oil fields. Sept. 11, provided a great excuse to pursue this petrochemical, economic, and "national security" objective.
23) On December 20, 1997, the national newspaper CONTACT: The Phoenix Project, published an interview on anthrax biowarfare threats and vaccinations in which Dr. Leonard Horowitz was asked "about the government's pressure to vaccinate [using the anthrax vaccine] and the bioweapons scare tactics, etc." He responded: "Look at the motive behind the persuasion, and what is it? They're preparing to blame it on the Muslims, Christian patriots, and militia groups. The militia groups are already dysfunctional because they're penetrated by agitators."
This is precisely what followed in the wake of the 9-11 attacks. Muslim groups were blamed for the 9-11 attacks. Christian patriots were blamed for the anthrax mailings. Militia groups were entirely silenced and even implicated. And false patriotism in which Americans welcome the destruction of basic constitutional liberties with CIA command over the entire U.S. military and Government has come to pass.
24) On October 31, 2001 the American people and U.S. Constitutional freedoms were attacked, not by the Taliban government or Muslim terrorists, but by CDC officials who advanced the "Model State Emergency Health Powers Act" that will force masses of people suspected of exposure to broadly-defined "infectious diseases" and biological weapons into concentration camp-like holding facilities for drugging, vaccination, and quarantine, without any viable legal recourse.
25) The entire 9-11 tragedy and subsequent threats to U.S. national and global securities fits far too perfectly with standard Machiavellian theory to be overlooked. This ongoing practice-the "problem/reaction/solution" agenda of precisely "managed chaos"-appears to be standard operating procedures for oligarchs historically bend on developing a "New World Order." Sadly now for the American people, as it has been for the Third World, this effort includes killing approximately half of the world's current population.
For more information, review the following websites:
http://www.tetrahedron.org/
http://www.prophecyandpreparedness.com/
http://www.copvcia.com/
http://www.davidicke.com/icke/index1a.html
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO109C.html
Courtesy of Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz
and Tetrahedron, LLC
206 North 4th Avenue, Suite 147
Sandpoint, Idaho 83864
http://www.tetrahedron.org/
Toll free order line: 888-508-4787;
Office telephone: 208-265-2575;
FAX: 208-265-2775
E-mail: tetra@tetrahedron.org
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)