Archive for October 21st, 2007

anthony @ 22:00 BST

On October 15, Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) introduced the American Freedom Agenda Act of 2007 (H.R. 3835) “To restore the Constitution’s checks and balances and protections against government abuses as envisioned by the Founding Fathers.”

The issues addressed by this bill are:

  • Military Commissions; Enemy Combatants; Habeas Corpus;
  • Torture or Coerced Confessions;
  • Intelligence Gathering;
  • Presidential Signing Statements;
  • Kidnaping, Detentions, and Torture Abroad;
  • Journalist Exception to Espionage Act; and
  • Use of Secret Evidence to Make Foreign Terrorist Designations.


Read Full Post »

Setting The Stage For a North American Union Currency

anthony @ 21:10

Dana Gabriel | Stop Lying | Wednesday, October 17, 2007

We live in a time of sky rocketing trade deficits. The housing bubble is ready to burst, and more and more jobs are being outsourced. America has become more of a service-based economy, resulting in a lower number of goods being exported. We are witnessing the death of the middle class by design. The dollar is being further devalued and its collapse is imminent. The global elite are looting the economy and setting the stage for a North American Union currency. They are the ones orchestrating the devaluation of the dollar, and will pose as our saviors by offering a single currency called the amero as their solution. Through the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) of North America, working groups are busy integrating the U.S., Canada, and Mexico into a North American Union. Those who do favor a European Union style continental integration view the idea of a unified currency as essential. Abandoning the dollar will be very unpopular with many Americans, but as it continues its painful collapse and becomes weaker, arguments for a regional currency will only be further bolstered.


Read Full Post »

By- Suzie-Q @ 12:39 PM MST

Iran warned on Saturday it would fire off 11,000 rockets at enemy bases within the space of a minute if the United States launched military action against the Islamic republic. “In the first minute of an invasion by the enemy, 11,000 rockets and cannons would be fired at enemy bases,” said a brigadier general in the elite Revolutionary Guards, Mahmoud Chaharbaghi.“This volume and speed of firing would continue,” added Chaharbaghi, who is commander of artillery and missiles of the Guards’ ground forces, according to the semi-official Fars news agency.The United States has never ruled out attacking Iran to end its defiance over the controversial Iranian nuclear programme, which the US alleges is aimed at making nuclear weapons but Iran insists is entirely peaceful.Iran has for its part vowed never to initiate an attack but has also warned of a crushing response to any act of aggression against its soil.“If a war breaks out in the future, it will not last long because we will rub their noses in the dirt,” said Chaharbaghi.

“Now the enemy should ask themselves how many of their people they are ready to have sacrificed for their stupidity in attacking Iran,” he said.

Iranian officials have repeatedly warned the military would target the bases of US forces operating in neighbouring Iraq and Afghanistan in the event of any attack and already has these sites under close surveillance.

Chaharbaghi said that the Guards would soon receive “rockets with a range of 250 kilometres (155 miles)” whereas the current range of its rockets is 150 kilometres (91 miles).

“We have identified our targets and with a close surveillance of targets, we can respond to the enemy’s stupidity immediately,” Chaharbaghi added.

He said that the Guards’ weapons were spread out throughout the country and so would not be affected by any isolated US strikes against military facilities.

The Guards are Iran’s elite ideological army and responsible for its most significant weapons such as the longer range Shahab-3 missile which has Israel and US bases in the Middle East within its range.


Read Full Post »

Afternoon Jukebox… Calling All Angels

By- Suzie-Q @ 12:07 PM MST

Lenny Kravitz – Calling all Angels

Read Full Post »

The War on Afghanistan Was Wrong, Too

Sudhan@12:25 CET

By Jacob Hornberger | LewRockwell.com, October 20, 2007

While most Americans have turned against the Iraq War, many of them still think that the war on Afghanistan was morally and legally justified. Their rationale is that the United States was simply defending itself by attacking Afghanistan and retaliating against those who had conspired to commit the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Of course, the last thing on people’s mind was that the 9/11 perpetrators themselves were retaliating for the bad things that the U.S. government had long been doing to people in the Middle East.

In fact, the irony of the attacks on both Afghanistan and Iraq is that both actions are simply a continuation of regime-change operations that have long characterized U.S. foreign policy, operations that are in large part responsible for much of the anger that foreigners have for the United States.

For example, there was the regime-change operation in Iran in 1953, where the CIA successfully ousted the democratically elected prime minister of Iran, Mohammed Mossadegh, and replaced him with the shah of Iran, whose brutal dictatorship ultimately culminated in the Iranian revolution in 1979. Not surprisingly, Iranians are still angry about that U.S.-imposed regime change.

Keep reading . . . 

Read Full Post »

Same Sh*t, Different Name!

anthony @ 10:04 BST

Two years ago, French and Dutch voters rejected the EU Constitution, effectively killing it. EU leaders have just produced a treaty that is supposed to be different. But it is already being labeled by some as a duplicate of what was rejected.

No sooner did the EU leaders agree on a treaty to replace the rejected 2004 Constitution than demands arose for approval by referendum in some of the 27 member nations. To date, only Ireland is on record as planning to hold a referendum.

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown defiantly rejected rising insistence in his country for a referendum, a process promised by predecessor Tony Blair. Brown effectively set his opinion above the polls, the opposition party, the unions and the mushrooming anti-EU press in skeptical England. Claiming that any protections needed to guarantee British interests are included in the new treaty, Brown will face stiff resistance when he goes before parliament and asks for ratification. For the treaty to take effect, it must be ratified by all 27 nations – either in their parliaments or by way of a referendum.

New EU treaty must be put to referendums

EUOBSERVER | By Jens-Peter Bonde |18.10.2007 – 17:27 CET

Is there any real difference between the rejected European Constitution and the new Reform Treaty to be signed off by EU leaders in Lisbon this week?

Legal experts have compared the rejected constitution with the new treaty and found 105 new EU competences in the old version and 105 in the new.

There are 68 new areas for majority voting in the old text, and 68 in the new. There are two less and two more. The net result is the same. If there were good arguments for having referendums on the original EU constitution, they remain the same now.

The two texts are identical in their legal obligations. The same laws that could be decided on the basis of the rejected constitution can now also be decided under the new Reform Treaty.


Read Full Post »

Rove: Valerie Plame “Fair Game”

anthony @ 09:50 BST

Plame Tells of Betrayal in New Memoir

Truthdig | Posted on Oct 20, 2007

Valerie Plame

In her new memoir, former CIA officer Valerie Plame tells of her shock as the Bush administration presented evidence in 2003 that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction—“I knew key parts of it were wrong,” she says—as well as her take on her outing as a CIA employee.

The Washington Post:

She and her colleagues, she wrote, believed that Saddam Hussein was hiding chemical and biological weapons, which she feared would be used against U.S. troops. But there was scant evidence to support those concerns, and she was certain that the president and his aides were publicly exaggerating the nuclear threat posed by Iraq at the time.

“What we struggled so hard to obtain was much too thin and not nearly robust enough to start a war over,” she asserts in “Fair Game: My Life as a Spy, My Betrayal by the White House.” The book, published by Simon & Schuster, is scheduled to go on sale Monday.

The title refers to a comment attributed to Karl Rove, who during his tenure as a White House adviser reportedly told a journalist that “Joe Wilson’s wife is fair game” for a White House intent on discrediting the former ambassador. He became a target after he publicly revealed that he had investigated, on behalf of the CIA, reports that Iraq had tried to buy uranium from Niger. A year after he reported that there was no evidence to support the claim, it appeared in Bush’s State of the Union speech, two months before the president ordered troops into Iraq.

Read more

Read Full Post »

%d bloggers like this: