Microsoft Word bytes Tony Blair in the butt

Home > Privacy > Blair\'s Iraq Dossier

Richard M. Smith (rms@computerbytesman.com)
June 30, 2003

Microsoft Word documents are notorious for containing private information in file headers which people would sometimes rather not share. The British government of Tony Blair just learned this lesson the hard way.

Back in February 2003, 10 Downing Street published a dossier on Iraq\'s security and intelligence organizations. This dossier was cited by Colin Powell in his address to the United Nations the same month. Dr. Glen Rangwala, a lecturer in politics at Cambridge University, quickly discovered that much of the material in the dossier was actually plagiarized from a U.S. researcher on Iraq.

You can read Dr. Rangwala\'s original analysis of the dossier from Feb. 5, 2003 at this URL:

http://www.casi.org.uk/discuss/2003/msg00457.html

Blair\'s government made one additional mistake: they published the dossier as a Microsoft Word file on their Web site. When I first heard from Dr. Rangwala about the dossier, I decided to try to learn who had worked on the document. I downloaded the Word file containing the dossier from the 10 Downing Street Web site (http://www.number-10.gov.uk/) and found the following revision log in the file:

Rev. #1: \"cic22\" edited file \"C:\\DOCUME~1\\phamill\\LOCALS~1\\Temp\\AutoRecovery save of Iraq - security.asd\"
Rev. #2: \"cic22\" edited file \"C:\\DOCUME~1\\phamill\\LOCALS~1\\Temp\\AutoRecovery save of Iraq - security.asd\"
Rev. #3: \"cic22\" edited file \"C:\\DOCUME~1\\phamill\\LOCALS~1\\Temp\\AutoRecovery save of Iraq - security.asd\"
Rev. #4: \"JPratt\" edited file \"C:\\TEMP\\Iraq - security.doc\"
Rev. #5: \"JPratt\" edited file \"A:\\Iraq - security.doc\"
Rev. #6: \"ablackshaw\" edited file \"C:\\ABlackshaw\\Iraq - security.doc\"
Rev. #7: \"ablackshaw\" edited file \"C:\\ABlackshaw\\A;Iraq - security.doc\"
Rev. #8: \"ablackshaw\" edited file \"A:\\Iraq - security.doc\"
Rev. #9: \"MKhan\" edited file \"C:\\TEMP\\Iraq - security.doc\"
Rev. #10: \"MKhan\" edited file \"C:\\WINNT\\Profiles\\mkhan\\Desktop\\Iraq.doc\"

Most Word document files contain a revision log which is a listing of the last 10 edits of a document, showing the names of the people who worked with the document and the names of the files that the document went under. Revision logs are hidden and cannot be viewed in Microsoft Word. However I wrote a small utility for extracting and displaying revision logs and other hidden information in Word .DOC files.

It is easy to spot the following four names in the revision log of the Blair dossier:
P. Hamill
J. Pratt
A. Blackshaw
M. Khan In addition, the \"cic22\" in the first three entries of the revision log stands for \"Communications Information Centre,\" a unit of the British Government.

Back in February, I passed along these 4 names to Dr. Rangwala who then provided them to a number of reports in the UK. One reporter quickly identified the four individuals as:

Paul Hamill - Foreign Office official
John Pratt - Downing Street official
Alison Blackshaw - The personal assistant of the Prime Minister\'s press secretary
Murtaza Khan - Junior press officer for the Prime Minister

During the week of June 23, 2003, the British Parliament held hearings of the Blair Dossier and other PR efforts by the UK Government leading up to the Iraq war. Alastair Campbell of the UK Communications Information Centre was put in the hot seat and had to explain the dossier plagiarism and details of the revision log.

One of the interesting tidbits that came out of the hearings is that John Pratt provided the dossier on a floppy disk to Alison Blackshaw to give to Colin Powell for his presentation before the United Nations. The revision log shows the document being copied from Pratt\'s hard drive to a floppy disk in revisions #4 and #5.

The Word version of the dossier was recently removed from the 10 Downing Street Web site, but I archived a copy of the Feb. 6 version here:

IRAQ - ITS INFRASTRUCTURE OF CONCEALMENT, DECEPTION AND INTIMIDATION
http://www.computerbytesman.com/privacy/blair.doc The Blair government learned its lesson well with regard to publishing Microsoft Word documents. Another report on Iraq that was published in June 2003 was only available as a PDF file. PDF files do not contain revision logs or hidden author information.
Links
Dr. Glen Rangwala\'s analysis of the Iraq dossier, Feb. 2003
http://www.casi.org.uk/discuss/2003/msg00457.html

Dr. Glen Rangwala\'s paper submitted to Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Commons, June 16, 2003
http://middleeastreference.org.uk/fac030616.html

Iraq\'s Security and Intelligence Network: A Guide and Analysis, Sept. 2002
http://meria.idc.ac.il/journal/2002/issue3/jv6n3a1.html

Downing St dossier plagiarised, Feb. 6, 2003
http://www.channel4.com/news/2003/02/week_1/06_dossier.html

Britain Admits That Much of Its Report on Iraq Came From Magazines, Feb. 8, 2003
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20B1EFD395F0C7B8CDDAB0894DB404482

Straw\'s letter to WMD inquiry
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12956,983396,00.html

Campbell: In the line of fire
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=418480

The key backroom players
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/5475182

WD97: How to Minimize Metadata in Microsoft Word Documents
http://support.microsoft.com:80/support/kb/articles/Q223/7/90.ASP

Dr. Glen Rangwala\'s Web site
http://middleeastreference.org.uk

10 Downing Street Web site
http://www.number-10.gov.uk
Copyright (C) 2003 Richard M. Smith

http://www.computerbytesman.com/privacy/blair.htm

K zcela bezprecedentní události došlo v pátek večer v sílící kontroverzi mezi britskou vládou a veřejnoprávní společností BBC ohledně údajné vládní manipulace týkající se Iráku. Když dostal mocný tiskový mluvčí Tonyho Blaira Alastair Campbell od šéfa zpravodajství BBC devítistránkový dopis, v němž mu bylo energicky sděleno, že se BBC nebude nijak omlouvat, Campbell si vynutil - ačkoliv byl už předtím vedením pořadu odmítnut - živé interview v komerční televizi Channel Four. Prostě se dostavil do budovy těsně po začátku vysílání hlavních večerních zpráv a dožadoval se přístupu do studia. Podle pozorovatelů tím vážně ohrozil svou další politickou kariéru. Podrobnosti níže:

Český překlad devítistránkové reakce ředitele zpravodajství BBC na Campbellovy útoky

vice:

http://www.blisty.cz/txt.php?id=14570&iid=1326

Jak \"vysvětloval\" problém s kontroverzní zprávou o iráckých zbraních Jack Straw
Jack Straw

Promiňte, to není - to - to - to se vám nesnažím říct. Ale samozřej - Ne, promiňte, bylo to v - ještě jednou, já -

V pátek vystoupil britský ministr zahraničních věcí Jack Straw před parlamentním výborem Dolní sněmovny, kde byl vyslýchán ohledně toho, kdy britská vláda včlenila do své oficiální zprávy o Iráku kontroverzní tvrzení, že Saddám Husajn může zaútočit svými zbraněmi hromadného ničení do 45 minut. Zde je výňatek z tohoto pozoruhodného vystoupení. Vysílal ho britský rozhlas v pátek v podvečer:


Reklama Reklama

Jack Straw: Tyto informace dostal Výbor pro práci rozvědek, pokud se pamatuji, začátkem září. A od toho data, podle hodnocení Výboru pro práci rozvědek, byla tato informace přesně zahrnuta v té vládní zprávě.

Předseda parlamentního výboru:Takže byla dodána později.

Jack Straw: Promiňte, to není - to - to - to se vám nesnažím říct. Ale samozřej-

Předseda parlamentního výboru: Takže odpověď - odpověď zní: bylo to tam skutečně dodáno později a nebylo to v první verzi.

Jack Straw: Ne, promiňte, bylo to v - ještě jednou, já -

Předseda parlamentního výboru: Ale to je velmi důležitá věc, pane ministře zahraničních věcí.

Jack Straw: Pane Ottaway, ne, je - je to naprosto bezvýznamná věc, aniž bych vás chtěl urazit.

Předseda parlamentního výboru: Avšak strávil jste posledních třicet minut úsilím ji vyvrátit.

Jack Straw: Je to absolutně nedůležité. Šlo o toto: obvinění není, že výrok o tom, že Saddám může užít svých zbraní do 45 minut, se objevil nikoliv v první verzi dokumentu, ale až v druhé verzi dokumentu. To je nutno říct jasně. Obvinění zní, že tvrzení o možnosti užít zbraně do 45 minut nebylo řádně zdrojováno a potvrzeno a bylo pak na žádost vlády \"zdramatizováno\" - -

Předseda parlamentního výboru: K tomu se dostaneme. Teď se vás ptám na něco úplně jiného. Jestli se toto tvrzení objevilo v první verzi dokumentu.

Jack Straw: Říkám vám, že - - éé - promiňte - -

Předseda parlamentního výboru: Tohle všechno můžete vynechat. Odpovězte jednoduše: Ano či ne.

Jack Straw: Protože, já se vám snažím říci, že se to objevilo v první verzi až poté, co jsme tyto informace dostali. Tedy je z definice jasné, že to nemohlo -

Předseda parlamentního výboru: Takže to nebylo v první verzi, bylo to v následující verzi. Takže to to bylo přidáno později.

Jack Straw: Formulujete to absolutně nepřijatelně, pane Ottaway.

http://www.blisty.cz/txt.php?id=14566&iid=1326

A New American Century?

Iraq and the hidden euro-dollar wars

by F. William Engdahl, USA/Germany

Despite the apparent swift U.S. military success in Iraq, the U.S. dollar has yet to benefit as safe haven currency. This is an unexpected development, as many currency traders had expected the dollar to strengthen on the news of a U.S. win. Capital is flowing out of the dollar, largely into the Euro. Many are beginning to ask whether the objective situation of the U.S. economy is far worse than the stock market would suggest. The future of the dollar is far from a minor issue of interest only to banks or currency traders. It stands at the heart of Pax Americana, or as it is called, The American Century, the system of arrangements on which America’s role in the world rests.

Yet, even as the dollar is steadily dropping against the Euro after the end of fighting in Iraq, Washington appears to be deliberately worsening the dollar fall in public comments. What is taking place is a power game of the highest geopolitical significance, the most fateful perhaps, since the emergence of the United States in 1945 as the world’s leading economic power.

The coalition of interests which converged on war against Iraq as a strategic necessity for the United States, included not only the vocal and highly visible neo-conservative hawks around Defense Secretary Rumsfeld and his deputy, Paul Wolfowitz. It also included powerful permanent interests, on whose global role American economic influence depends, such as the influential energy sector around Halliburton, Exxon Mobil, ChevronTexaco and other giant multinationals. It also included the huge American defense industry interests around Boeing, Lockheed-Martin, Raytheon, Northrup-Grumman and others. The issue for these giant defense and energy conglomerates is not a few fat contracts from the Pentagon to rebuild Iraqi oil facilities and line the pockets of Dick Cheney or others. It is a game for the very continuance of American power in the coming decades of the new century. That is not to say that profits are made in the process, but it is purely a bypro-duct of the global strategic issue.

In this power game, least understood is the role of preserving the dollar as the world reserve currency, as a major driving factor contributing to Washington’s power calculus over Iraq in the past months. American domination in the world ultimately rests on two pillars — its overwhelming military superiority, especially on the seas; and its control of world economic flows through the role of the dollar as the world’s reserve currency. More and more it is clear that the Iraq war was more about preserving the second pillar – the dollar role – than the first, the military. In the dollar role, oil is a strategic factor.

vice:

http://www.currentconcerns.ch/archive/2003/04/20030409.phphttp://www.currentconcerns.ch/archive/2003/04/20030409.php

The Basics

Why isn\'t cash obsolete ?

Better investing. Smarter spending. The new, improved MSN Money.

A cashless world is coming -- just a lot later than we expected -- and it’s going to revolve around single plastic cards that provide currency, identification, security clearance and a whole lot more.

...

So what, exactly, happened to the idea of the cashless society? Actually, analysts say, it’s still coming. The percentage of consumer purchases made with cash or checks has fallen from 80% in 1994 to 66% now, according to Frost & Sullivan, a Mountain View, Calif., market research firm. Credit and debit card usage has jumped from 20% to 29% of purchases, with debit cards accounting for much of that gain. Purchases made via phones and other technologies make up the difference.

We have the technology

But the road to a truly cashless society where all you need is a card is a lot longer and bumpier than originally thought. The problem isn’t so much a technological one -- the technology to replace cash exists. You can see examples of the smart card at work in closed environments or specific industries and places: the Washington D.C. metro, various college cafeterias and some laundromats, for example. In these cases, the chip card is loaded with a dollar value and the amount of a purchase is deducted when a “reader” scans the card at the point of sale.

...

http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/Banking/Betterbanking/P38222.asp

China readies for future U.S. fight

By CNN Senior China Analyst Willy Wo-Lap Lam

Beijing has said the war in Iraq would lead to a humanitarian catastrophe.

HONG KONG, China (CNN) -- The Iraqi war has convinced the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leadership that some form of confrontation with the U.S. could come earlier than expected.

Beijing has also begun to fine-tune its domestic and security policies to counter the perceived threat of U.S. \"neo-imperialism.\"

As more emphasis is being put on boosting national strength and cohesiveness, a big blow could be dealt to both economic and political reform.

That the new leadership has concluded China is coming up against formidable challenges in the short to medium term is evident from recent statements by President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao.

Hu indicated earlier this year Beijing must pay more attention to global developments so that \"China make good preparations before the rainstorm ... and be in a position to seize the initiative.\"

...

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/east/03/24/willy.column/

Iraqi elections cancelled by U.S.

Army hand-picks its own mayors
Frustration builds among citizens

WILLIAM BOOTH AND RAJIV CHANDRASEKARAN
SPECIAL TO THE STAR

SAMARRA, Iraq—U.S. military commanders have ordered a halt to local elections and self-rule in provincial cities and towns across Iraq, choosing instead to install their own hand-picked mayors and administrators, many of whom are former Iraqi military leaders.

The decision to deny Iraqis a direct role in selecting municipal governments is creating anger and resentment among aspiring leaders and ordinary citizens, who say the U.S.-led occupation forces aren\'t making good on their promise to bring greater freedom and democracy to a country dominated for three decades by former president Saddam Hussein.

...

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1056838210022&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154

Senator Urges Burying Muslim “Terrorists” With Pig Entrails As Deterrent

Jun 30, 2003
Source: Boston Globe Via Islamic Community Net

Senator Guy W. Glodis has angered Muslims and a civil rights group over a flier he sent to fellow senators that says terrorist attacks could be deterred if convicted Muslim extremists were buried with pig entrails.

The flier, which Glodis’s 39 colleagues received Wednesday, said an execution of Muslim extremists in the Philippines was ordered by General John Joseph “Black Jack” Pershing before World War I, in which the terrorists were shot with bullets dipped in pigs’ blood, then buried with “pigs’ blood, entrails, etc.” According to the flier, contact with the blood and entrails of pigs “instantly barred” Muslims from paradise, dooming them to hell. It said news of the burial deterred other terrorist attacks for “the next forty-two years.”

...

http://www.jihadunspun.net/intheatre_internal.php?article=64021&list=/home.php&

North Korea ‘to test nuke by end of year’

By Sue O’Reilly

NORTH KOREA has enough plutonium to make six to 10 nuclear weapons and could test such a weapon by the end of the year, a former US negotiator with the Stalinist state said in an interview published yesterday.


“To the best of my knowledge, based on very well-informed Washington sources, North Korea’s nuclear program is moving ahead very quickly,” Kenneth Quinones was quoted as saying by the Daily Yomiuri.

“Basically, this means North Korea’s reprocessing (of plutonium from spent nuclear fuel) is almost finished, or has finished.

This means North Korea now has enough plutonium to make six to 10 nuclear weapons,” he said.

...

http://www.examiner.ie/pport/web/world/Full_Story/did-sgTJs2a9-GZZ2sgdL11Zs5FWAE.asp

********
News Archive: Arming North Korea

The two faces of Rumsfeld

Donald Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary, sat on the board of a company which three years ago sold two light water nuclear reactors to North Korea.

Full story....
April 28 2003

Rummy\'s North Korea Connection

What did Donald Rumsfeld know about ABB\'s deal to build nuclear reactors there? And why won\'t he talk about it?

Full story....
February 24 2003

Rumsfeld was on ABB board during deal with North Korea

Donald Rumsfeld, the US secretary of defense, was on the board of technology giant ABB when it won a deal to supply North Korea with two nuclear power plants.

Full story....
January 17 2003

Bush Seeks $3.5 Million for Group Building N. Korean Reactors

President George W. Bush is seeking $3.5 million for the international consortium that continues to build two nuclear reactors for North Korea, even as the U.S. confronts the communist regime over nuclear arms.

Full story....
October 19 2002

Clinton Deal Gave N. Korea 100-Nuke-Per-Year Capacity

Light water nuclear reactors provided to North Korea under a 1994 deal negotiated by the Clinton administration have the capacity to generate enough nuclear fuel to produce almost 100 nuclear bombs per year, a 1999 congressional study warned.

Full story....
August 8 2002

U.S. Helps America-Hating North Korea Build Nukes

A concrete-pouring ceremony Wednesday marked the beginning of a U.S.-led project to build two light-water nuclear reactors in North Korea.

Full story....
April 3 2002

US grants N Korea nuclear funds

The US Government has announced that it will release $95m to North Korea as part of an agreement to replace the Stalinist country\'s own nuclear programme, which the US suspected was being misused.

Full story....

http://www.prisonplanet.com/archives_arming_nkorea.html

Global War Looms?

Top U.S. Officials Discuss Expanding ‘Terror War’ to Iran, Beyond

A secret, quiet meeting in Kuwait between some of Washington’s top war hawks could signal that Iran is next on the chopping block.

By Gordon Thomas

Two weeks ago, a prince of the Kuwaiti Royal family received a phone call from an aide to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld asking if the complex was available. The prince already suspected it was needed for one of those secret meetings, which Washington has taken to holding in the Gulf.

The next day a Hercules transport landed at Kuwait’s international airport. From it emerged a group of pale-faced, middle-aged men in drill shirts and chinos. They carried laptops and bulky briefcases.

To a casual observer they were just another delegation from Washington involved in post-war Iraq. But these men were the forward planners for the next war—the one against Iran.

Within an hour of installing themselves in their palatial surroundings—securely guarded by U.S. forces—they had unloaded their maps of Iran, downloaded their computer images of its terrain and set about planning “Target Iran.”

Secure communications lines had been established and tested with Washington. One was to the CIA, another to the Pentagon. Down those lines and on to their secure computers, the Kuwaiti task force would receive the latest intelligence from inside Iran.

Some of that intel would come from Israel—from Mossad deep cover agents in Tehran.

They will ensure that “Target Iran” being planned in that royal complex would lack nothing in information. The men based there are a Pentagon think tank for the next war.

They are some of the “neo-cons”—a new breed of “conservative” intellectuals who are determined to steer the Bush administration toward an even more aggressive, go-it-alone posture. They are headed in Washington by the hard-liner, John Bolton, the under-secretary of state for arms control.

The day the “neo-cons” landed in Kuwait, Bolton, a political mirror image of Rumsfeld, had issued a new warning about a supposed nuclear threat posed by Iran.

Bolton did so in a speech to the annual conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee in Washington. His theme was the nuclear dangers “this administration intends to confront once the war with Iraq is over.”

He concluded: “In the aftermath of Saddam, dealing with the Iranian nuclear weapons program will be of equal importance to dealing with the threat that North Korea continues to pose.”

His powerful audience—many of them key lobbyists for Israel on Capitol Hill—gave him a standing ovation. This was what they had come to hear. After Iraq—Iran.

They knew that Bolton, a grey-suited saturnine man with a colorless speaking style, was there as the front man for other powerful men in the Bush administration. They include Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz and Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith. They are the most senior Pentagon officials after Rumsfeld.

Other members of this group include Lewis Libby, chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney and Elliot Abrams, in charge of Middle East policy at the National Security Council. All are key supporters of Israel. They also form the very core of advocacy for Bush’s “muscular democracy.” This is dedicated to attacking America’s “enemies” head on.

Former CIA Director James Woolsey, in a recent speech in Los Angeles, said: “The Iraq campaign is really just the start of the Third World War and one that may well last for decades.”

The neo-cons in their Kuwait redoubt had brought with them to the hot desert sands a list of targets. They included Pakistan, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Burma, Cuba, North Korea and eventually China.

In their briefcases was a copy of what has become their leitmotif: the briefing paper CIA Director George Tenet prepared for Bush on overall global strategy.

“By 2015 China will have deployed many missiles with nuclear warheads targeted against the United States, mostly more-survivable land and sea mobile missiles,” states the paper.

To prepare for the attack on Iran—expected in early 2004, less than a year from now—the team of analysts, logisticians and support specialists gathered in the Kuwait holiday complex. They have been ordered to get their plans for an assault on Iran up and running.

“Target Iran” will follow the same ruthless, all-consuming path as the destruction of the Saddam regime.

IRAQI BASES

Already, in the plans to rebuild Iraq, the Pentagon has earmarked Saddam’s military airfields for its use against Iran.

U.S. bases in Afghanistan will provide the most powerful air force in the world with the ability to launch a pincer air attack.

This will be supported by U.S. carriers and missile-launching battleships in the Gulf.

Turkey will be dragooned into allowing its air space to be used for northern air attacks.

The neo-cons estimate that Iran can, in the words of Bolton, be “rolled-over” in double quick time, “probably quicker than it took to wrap up Saddam.”

The mullahs of Tehran are, in comparison to Iraq, poorly equipped. Their aircraft, in modern terms, are nearly vintage. They have nothing to match America’s F-18s or its tank-busters.

True, on the ground it can put into the field a substantial army. But again, it is ill equipped to fight a modern tech-war.

The neo-cons press on—ignoring the warning of seasoned diplomats in the State Department.

Two of Secretary of State Colin Powell’s advisers wrote a memo to him stating there was a growing risk that the policies advocated by Bolton and his group are “spreading growing resentment around the world.”

A copy was faxed to National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice. It would not have influenced her. She is the hard-liner closest to Bush. She is the soft-spoken and articulate voice of the architects of American military might.

In the early days of the Bush administration, she kept the peace between Rumsfeld and Powell.

In a memorable phrase about this part of her work, she said: “my job is to let Colin talk people to death while allowing Donald to say he is going to hit him over the head if they didn’t listen.”

But now she is firmly in the Rumsfeld corner. Powell, for all his brave words about the war in Iraq being essential, is still becoming increasingly marginalized. His personal relationship with Rice has been reduced to frosty smiles at cabinet meetings.

At the meetings Bolton holds with his key Pentagon officials, with Rumsfeld sometimes sitting in, Powell is excluded.

The key element of their plotting is that Iraq is the natural “road map” to dealing with Iran.

Which road will Bush finally take? The answer almost certainly lies in the Washington calendar for action.

Another U.S. election year approaches. The all-powerful Israeli lobby in the United States will press hard for action so that Iran can no longer pose a threat to Israel.

And just as hard-line Zionists like to say, “next year in Jerusalem,” so its hawkish Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has started to murmur “next year in Tehran—God and Mr. Bush willing.”

http://www.americanfreepress.net/06_29_03/Global_War_Looms_/global_war_looms_.html

Israel cuts off ties with BBC

By Anat Balint, Haaretz Correspondent

Israel declared over the weekend that it is cutting
off ties with the BBC to protest a repeat
broadcast on non-conventional weapons said to be
in Israel.

The program was broadcast for
the first time in March in
Britain, and was rerun Saturday
on a BBC channel that is aired
all over the world.

The boycott decision was made by
Israel\'s public relations
forum, made up of
representatives from the Prime
Minister\'s Office, the Foreign Ministry and the
Government Press Office.

It was decided that government offices won\'t
assist BBC producers and reporters, that
Israeli officials will not give interviews to
the British network, and that the Government
Press Office will make it difficult for BBC
employees to get press cards and work visas in
Israel.

Before the broadcast Saturday, Israeli officials
tried to pressure the BBC to cancel the
broadcast, saying that the program was biased
and presented Israel as an evil dictatorship,
ignoring the existential threat it was facing.


The forum members were furious at the trailers
to the program, which showed pictures of the
Dimona nuclear reactor and the biological
institute in Nes Tziona, with the narrator
saying, \"Which country in the Middle East has
not declared the nuclear and biological weapons
in its possession?\"

The trailer also says that there is no external
supervision over Israel, \"which is holding in
custody for 17 years a man who has leaked its
secrets.\"

The broadcast deals with Israel\'s attempts to
maintain a policy of ambiguity on its nuclear
weapons, through the Va\'anunu affair, the trial
of Brigadier General Yitzhak Ya\'akov and the
incidents of cancer among the Dimona nuclear
reactor workers.

Danny Seaman, the head of the Government Press
Office, has been saying for some time that the
BBC has a clear anti-Israel policy, bordering
on anti-Semitism. Seaman told Army Radio on
Sunday that the BBC broadcast was an attempt to
tarnish Israel.

...

http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/312675.html

Britská vláda útočí na sdělovací prostředky

Ve čtvrtek zaútočila britská vláda bezprecedentním způsobem na veřejnoprávní BBC a požadovala omluvu za její tvrzení, že prý Blairovi lidé zkreslili a nepřípustně zdramatizovali oficiální zprávu o irácké hrozbě. Na tiskové konferenci s Vladimírem Putinem, který je v Británii na návštěvě, Tony Blair úmyslně odmítl odpovídat na otázky reportérů společnosti BBC. Jeho mluvčí dodal, že britská vláda nebude s BBC spolupracovat, \"dokud se neomluví\". Někteří labourističtí poslanci však poukázali na to, že se britská vláda jen snaží tímto umělým skandálem odvést pozornost od toho, že dosud nebyly nalezeny žádné irácké zbraně hromadného ničení.


Reklama Reklama

Je ironické, že tento útok od labouristické vlády přichází zrovna v době, kdy na BBC ostře útočí i britští konzervativci a nazývají ji \"Blair Broadcasting Corporation\" poté, co dva stoupenci Labouristické strany, Greg Dyke a Davyn Davies, byli jmenování generálním ředitelem BBC a předsedou její správní rady.

Vztahy mezi BBC a britskou vládou nebyly takto nepřátelské od roku 1986, kdy tehdejší předseda vládnoucí Konzervativní strany Norman Tebbit zaútočil na BBC pro její kritiku amerického bombardování Libye. Tehdejší útoky na BBC byly však vedeny jen z ústředí Konzervativní strany, kdežto nyní užívá proti BBC Tony Blair celé vládní mašinérie.

Blair se domnívá, že parlamentní výbor pro zahraniční záležitosti schválí vládní verzi událostí a odmítne kritiku BBC, že do ní bylo na poslední chvíli včleněno tvrzení, že Saddam Husajn může zaútočit svými ZHN do 45 minut. Blairův tiskový mluvčí Alastair Campbell zamýšlí dokázat, že toto tvrzení bylo už v první verzi zprávy, a že tedy nebylo dodáno \"na poslední chvíli\", jak tvrdí BBC.

Campbell, který má ve zvyku se chovat vůči \"nepřátelským\" novinářům velmi agresivně, vydal BBC ultimátum a požadoval v něm, aby se do čtvrtečního večera za svá tvrzení omluvila.

Šéf zpravodajství BBC Richard Sambrook konstatoval, že BBC bude na \"tuto záležitost\" řádně reagovat, nikoliv však do doby, kterou určil Campbell.

http://www.blisty.cz/txt.php?id=14557&iid=1325

vcera byl na ceskem rozhlasu zajimavy porad o agende21 a jeji postupne implementaci v ramci EU
a v CR:

http://www.agenda21.cz/


JAXXE --- --- 14:59:10 26.8.2002

AGENDA 21

WHAT IS AGENDA 21?

Agenda 21 is the official report of the United Nations Rio de Janeiro World Summit Conference of 1992, which was built on the premises of General Assembly resolution 44/228 of 22 December 1989, which was adopted when the nations of the world (?) called for the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development.

It is a plan that calls for the international control and regulation of virtually every aspect of human activity that might impact the environment, which is essentially everything humans do.

It is one of the most arrogant statements of government ever conceived, for it literally assumes that man can recreate the Garden of Eden (but only if he has sound direction from a world governing body). A partial list of chapter titles should give you a hint of what this document is all about:

* Chapter 3, Combating Poverty

* Chapter 4, Changing Consumption Patterns

* Chapter 6, Protecting and Promoting Human Health

* Chapter 24, Global Action for Women Towards Sustainable Development

* Chapter 25, Children and Youth in Sustainable Development

* Chapter 29, Strengthening the Role of Workers and Their Trade Unions

* Chapter 30, Strengthening the Role of Business and Industry

* Chapter 32, Strengthening the Role of Farmers

And so it goes through 40 chapters.

Admittedly, much of what is discussed is worth while, and we all should be concerned with the environmental conditions we create for ourselves and our posterity. But there is a great deal of scientific evidence that indicates the conditions are far from being the critical problem they are being portrayed to be; that much of the so-called evidence being relayed to the public is based on less than scientific assumptions, and is being used to frighten people into accepting controls over their lives they would otherwise resist.

Even if most of the claims being made were valid, would it be appropriate to turn the sovereignty of nations over to some unelected world body that will exercise dictatorial powers over the nations\' populations?

We do not think so. We still believe it is in the best interest of the American people to have a government that is -- of the people, by the people and for the people, -- not one that would be accountable to no one but itself. That is exactly the kind of government the United Nations is trying to establish, and Americans are being kept in the dark about it by their own elected officials and a news media that is in sympathy with the global ethos.

We offer the following verbatim quotations from Agenda 21 in the hope that it will help give you some understanding of the character of those behind this movement. Underlining or boldface is added for emphasis.

* This partnership commits all States to engage in a continuous and constructive dialogue, inspired by the need to achieve a more efficient and equitable world economy. [Ch. 2, Para. 2.1]

* ...consensus-building at the intersection of the environmental and trade and development areas will be ongoing in existing international forums, as well as in the domestic policy of each country. [Ch. 2, Para. 2.4]

* The removal of existing distortions in international trade is essential. (Ch. 2, Para. 2.7)

* Provide for an equitable, secure, non-discriminatory and predictable international trading system; [Ch. 2, Para. 2.10(b)]

* ...create a focus in national development plans and budgets on investment in human capital,with special policies and programmes directed at rural areas, the urban poor, women and children. [Ch. 3, Para. 3.4(d)]

* Sustainable development must be achieved at every level of society. [Ch. 3, Para. 3.7]

* Measures to be undertaken at the international level for the protection and enhancement of the environment must take fully into account the current imbalances in the global patterns of consumption and production. [Ch. 4, Para. 4.4]

* Achieving the goals of environmental quality and sustainable development will require efficiency in production and changes in consumption patterns... [Ch. 4, Para. 4.15]

* Governments ... should strive to...develop a domestic policy framework that will encourage a shift to more sustainable patterns of production and consumption. [Ch. 4, Para. 4.17(b)]

* Without the stimulus of prices and market signals that make clear to producers and consumers the environmental costs of the consumption of energy, materials and natural resources and the generation of wastes, significant changes in consumption and production patterns seem unlikely to occur in the near future. [Ch. 4, Para. 4.24]

* Population data should be disaggregated by, inter alia, sex and age in order to take into account the implications of the gender division of labor for the use and management of natural resources. [Ch. 5, Para. 5.28]

* Population programmes should be implemented along with natural resource management and developing programmes at the local level... [Ch. 5, Para. 5.43]

* Proposals should be developed for local, national and international population/environment programmes in line with specific needs for achieving sustainability. [Ch. 5, Para. 5.56]

* Governments should take active steps to implement programmes to establish and strengthen preventive and curative health facilities which include women-centred, women-managed,safe and effective reproductive health care and affordable, accessible services, as appropriate, for the responsible planning of family size... [Ch. 6, Para. 6.26]

* The health and well-being of all urban dwellers must be improved so that they can contribute to the economic and social development. [Ch. 6, Para.6.33]

* As a first step towards the goal of providing adequate shelter for all, countries should take immediate measures to provide shelter to their homeless poor ... [Ch. 7, Para. 7.9(a)]

* All countries should ... Formulate appropriate land-use policies and introduce planning regulations specially aimed at the protection of eco-sensitive zones against physical disruption by construction and construction-related activities. [Ch. 7, Para. 7.69(d)]

* Monitoring and evaluating the development process systematically, conducting regular reviews of the state of human resources development, economic and social conditions and trends, the state of the environment and natural resources; [Ch.8, Para. 8.4(d)]

* Laws and regulations suited to country specific conditions are among the most important instruments for transforming environment and development policies into action, not only through \"command and control\" methods, but also as a normative framework for economic planning and market instruments. [Ch. 8, Para. 8.13]

* ...since the transport sector is also a source of atmospheric emissions, there is a need for a review of existing transport systems and for more effective design and management of traffic and transport systems. [Ch. 9, Para. 9.13]

(emphasis has been added)

Perhaps you are beginning to get the idea. Can you imagine roughly four hundred pages of this? Can you imagine your tax dollars going to pay for the time and effort that must have gone into the drafting of such a statist document? After all, the United States has been funding about 25% of all United Nations expenses, even more than that of their \"peace-keeping\" initiatives.

Agenda 21 outlines a state-controlled world for the twenty-first century. The state that will be in control will not be Alabama ... or Georgia ... or any other state, nor will it be the Government of the United States, and it will definitely not be a form of representative government.

Published by The Alabama Committee to Get US Out of the United Nations

http://doncasey.home.mindspring.com/unoag21.htm

JAXXE --- --- 12:00:22 26.8.2002
rozbor agendy 21 z hlediska NWO...

NEW WORLD ORDER CHARTS

http://www.womensgroup.org/KRULACK.html

...

Searched the web for \"Agenda 21\" \"new world order\". Results 1 - 10 of about 1,340.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=%22Agenda+21%22+%22new+world+order%22

JAXXE --- --- 11:51:32 26.8.2002
http://www.johannesburgsummit.org/

watch out, dneska zacina nejvetsi svetove forum v dejinach !

UN forum in South Africa to focus on sustainable development

23 August – More than 100 world leaders and 60,000 participants are set to convene in Johannesburg, South Africa, over the next two weeks as a key United Nations forum opens on Monday in an effort to find new initiatives for implementing sustainable development practices and building a prosperous and secure future for their citizens.

The World Summit on Sustainable Development, which will take place from 26 August to 4 September, comes 10 years after governments met at the so-called Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro and adopted Agenda 21, a roadmap for achieving sustainable development.

The Summit promises to be one of the largest and most important international meetings ever held on the integration of economic, environmental and social decision-making and will focus on building a commitment at the highest levels of government and society to better implement Agenda 21.

The official opening of the Summit will take place on Monday with an address by South African President Thabo Mbeki. As Secretary-General of the conference, UN Under-Secretary-General for Economic Affairs Nitin Desai, is scheduled to address the plenary next, to be followed by the Executive-Director of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), Klaus Toepfer. UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan is slated to speak at the opening of the Summit\'s high-level segment that begins on 2 September.

For the Summit, Mr. Annan has identified five key areas in which the meeting can make a difference. Known as WEHAB, the Secretary-General says the international community should focus on issues pertaining to water and sanitation, energy, health, agricultural productivity, and biodiversity and ecosystem management.

Delegates are expected to adopt an action plan detailing the priorities and activities that countries will pursue after Johannesburg, as well as a political statement reaffirming their commitment to work towards sustainable development.

While expressing continued support for the goals of Agenda 21, the two documents will specify concrete means of overcoming problems that have hampered the implementation of Agenda 21, with a renewed focus on those activities that can be realized in each priority area.

info o agenda 21:

http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/agenda21text.htm

X-ray vision shows air passengers naked

Ananova June 26 2003

The US government is considering using X-ray vision at airport security checkpoints to give a naked image of passengers. The magnetometers now in use at airports cannot detect plastic weapons or substances used in explosives.



Susan Hallowell, director of the Transportation Security Administration\'s security laboratory, demonstrated the system which bounces X-rays off her skin.

To the eye, she is dressed in a skirt and blazer. On the monitor, she is naked - except for a gun and a bomb that she hid under her outfit.

\"It does basically make you look fat and naked - but you see all this stuff,\" she said.

The technology is called \"backscatter\" because it scatters X-rays. Doses of rays deflected off dense materials such as metal or plastic produce a darker image than those deflected off skin.

Backscatter machines are already in use in prisons, to screen visitors, and in South African diamond mines where they are used to check workers at the end of shifts.

But they have never been used in airports. Ms Hallowell said the radiation dosage is comparable to sunshine but she accepts that passengers might not like the idea of staff seeing them naked.

The agency is trying to find a way to modify the machines with an electronic fig leaf - programming that fuzzes out sensitive body parts or distorts the body.

http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_794215.html?menu=news.latestheadlines

Riceová: Jaderné zbraně v Iránu a Koreji nestrpíme

USA jsou připraveny zasáhnout proti KLDR a Iránu samy

Zdroj: Foto AP

LONDÝN 27. června 2003 | 07:39 Spojené státy jsou připraveny zakročit samy proti Íránu a Severní Koreji, jestliže nebudou mít podporu evropských zemí v úsilí zabránit těmto dvěma státům vyvíjet jaderné zbraně. V Londýně to prohlásila poradkyně amerického prezidenta Condoleezza Riceová.

• Západ chce odříznout KLDR od světa
• Většina Američanů je pro vojenský útok proti Íránu
• Jižní Korea uplatila KLDR miliony dolarů

Riceová se snažila rozptýlit spekulace, že USA uvažují o válce proti Íránu. \"Určitě se nechceme dostat do situace, kdy se budeme muset problémem šíření zbraní (hromadného ničení) zabývat způsobem, jakým jsem to učinili v Iráku,\" řekla.

Britský list The Daily Telegraph, který výroky poradkyně zveřejnil, ale upozorňuje, že podobná prohlášení zněla z USA i před válkou v Iráku. \"Vyhnout se válce není samoúčelný cíl. V některých případech je třeba s tyrany válčit. Hledáme řešení, a tím není nečinnost. Utíkání se k mnohonárodnostnímu řešení je někdy totéž co nečinnost,\" řekla poradkyně.

Írán podle ní pracuje tajně na jaderné zbrani a Severní Koreji nesmí být dovoleno vydírat svět hrozbou obnovy jaderného programu.

Poradkyně tvrdila, že USA v záležitostech Íránu i KLDR hledají mezinárodní podporu a že nejlepší bude přimět Teherán, aby se podrobil inspekcím jaderných zařízení. V případě KLDR podle ní bude nejúčinnější, jestliže se zapojí vlivné státy oblasti.

http://www.lidovky.cz/clanek.phtml?id=182457

;))

Vážený státe,
rád bych věděl, kam mám zajít, abych se mohl úplně odhlásit ze státního penzijního systému. Mám na mysli podepsání nějakého prohlášení (reverzu), že až budu starý, nebudu od státu požadovat žádný důchod a na oplátku teď nebudu na tento systém muset platit. Rozhodl jsem se totiž, že bude jistější, když si sám budu spořit ve fondech, založím si akciové portfolio a koupím si na hypotéku nějakou nemovitost, kterou pak v důchodu buď prodám, nebo pronajmu. Mám totiž obavu, že jinak teď budu platit vysoké daně a až mi bude 65, stát řekne \"sorry, nejsou peníze na důchody - můžou za to předchozí vlády - to my ne. Jo a vy jste si vedle toho spořil do státem podporovaných penzijních fondů? Sorry, ale inflace produkovaná minulým vedením ČNB tyto úspory znehodnotila, nehledě k tomu, že vám ty úspory zdaníme sedmdesáti procenty, aby bylo na důchdy pro ty, kteří si nespořili. Jak by k tomu ti chudáci přišli, že...\"
Zároveň bych chtěl úplně přestat platit sociální pojištění, protože si myslím, že v mém oboru je riziko nezaměstnanosti relativně malé. Platit si toto pojištění má smysl přeci pouze pro ty, kteří mají reálný důvod se nezaměstnanosti obávat, ne? Kdyby mi patřila Petřínská rozledna, asi bych si ji také nepojišťoval proti povodni... A nebo bych se možná i proti nezaměstnanosti pojistil, ale rád bych si sjednal individuální podmínky v nějaké komerční pojišťovně, protože mám pocit, že rozumnější (pro obě strany) je odvíjet výši pojistného od míry rizika a ne od výše příjmů.
Také bych se rád zdravotně pojistil u nějaké komerční pojišťovny, opět podle míry mé zdravotní rizikovosti (sportuji, nekouřím, nepiju, nedýchám uhelný prach v dole, nebrousím sklo, nepracuji s trhavinami) a ne podle výše mého příjmu.
Také bych někde rád podepsal papír, že na smrt mé matky přísahám, že v životě nepoužiji služeb Českých drah, aby mi mohla být refundována část daní, která do ČD teče.
Také si myslím, že už stát za mé základní a střední vzdělání dostal ode mne daní dost. Zas tak dobré ty školy nebyly! Vysokou školu si platím sám, takže na školství bych již platit rád přestal. Nepřijde mi zrovna moc rozumné ani spravedlivé platit si školu sám a ještě ji platit někomu jinému jenom proto, že se u nás stát neobtěžoval zřídit studijní obor, který zrovna potřebuji studovat.
Také by mne zajímalo, jak se vyreklamovat z pravomoci Ministerstva pro místní rozvoj. Přijde mi totiž poněkud nespravedlivé, že sousední státní činžák, kde žijí vyvolení za poloviční náklady, než jaké platíme my přes ulici v družstevním domě, je nákladně rekonstruován také z mých daní. Když si budeme chtít opravit náš družstevní dům, budeme si to muset zaplatit ze svého, ale ty daně, které platíme i na rekonstrukci sousedního státního domu, nám už nikdo nevrátí. Přitom v tom státním domě zcela jistě nebydlí sociálně potřební občané, nejhorší auto, co před ním parkuje je Octavia.
Také bych se chtěl zeptat, kde na magistrátu se odhlásit od služeb městské policie. Ona totiž naši čtvrť navštíví jen občas a to výhradně z důvodu montáže botiček na auta, která opět díky městskému rozhodnutí nemají kde jinde parkovat. Bohužel již tato městská policie nijak nebrání pravidelnému vykrádáni aut či sklepů. Když jsem na toto městské policisty upozornil, doporučili mi, abychom si zřídili \"domobranu\" po vzoru některých sídlišť, nebo abychom si najali hlídače (ta drzost!). To druhé bych velice rád udělal - spočetl jsem si, že kdyby se náš blok složil na nočního hlídače, vyšlo by to na cca 100Kč na jednu domácnost. Věřím, že od té doby by krádeže ustaly. Jen nevím, jak odhlásit a neplatit služby městské policie, ktorou bychom pak nepotřebovali.
Proto bych se chtěl zeptat, vzhledem k tomu, že prý žijeme ve svobodném státě, na jaký úřad mám zajít, abych si mohl zaškrtat, které služby od státu chci a které ne. Je přeci nesmysl platit něco, co nepoptávám, ne? Myslím, že bych s chutí odhlásil i služby Statistického úřadu, Výzkumného ústavu pedagogického, Školských úřadů, Ústavu státu a práva, Úřadu pro státní informační systém a několika stovek dalších.
Také by bylo dobré, kdyby bylo možné nějak určit cenu jednotlivých služeb, které nám stát poskytuje. Proto je ale zapotřebí, aby tyto služby byly nabízeny na tržním principu a v prostředí konkurence. Když si totiž jdu koupit housku za 5Kč, jasně tím demonstruji, že ta houska pro mne má větší cenu, než mých 5Kč, resp. že houska je pro mne to nejlepší, co si za těch 5Kč mohu koupit. Také koupí té konkrétní housky demonstruji, že právě tato houska od tohoto konkrétního pekaře je to, co preferuji. Každý den tak vlastně svými peneženkami hlasujeme, co je pro nás důležitější a vhodnější. Se státními službami to tak není. Neznáme jejich cenu. Nevíme, zdali by je konkurence nenabídla levněji a kvalitněji. A hlavně namáme možnost se rozhodnout, zda-li o ty služby za daných podmínek stojíme. Můžeme odmítnout státní vzdělání a zaplatit si soukromou školu, ale povinnosti platit na státní školství nás to nezbaví. A tak je to se všemi státními službami - buď si jejich poskytování stát monopolizuje úplně, takže vůbec nemáme volbu, nemo na výběr máme, ale přesto pak musíme platit i tu státní službu, kterou jsme ale nahradili placenou službou od konkurence.
Bylo by dobré, kdyby antimonopolní úřad přinutil stát vzdát se svých monopolů (na sociální pojišťení, na emisi peněz, na rozhodování sporů, na zajišťování pořádku, atd...). Také by ten antimonopolní úřad měl postihnout sám sebe za monopolizaci práva na rozhodování antimonopolních kauz. Problém asi bude v tom, že instituce, které by nás měly i před státem chránit (od Antimonopolního úřadu až po Ústavní soud) jsou vlastně jeho součástí.
A tak bych byl rád, kdybyste mi poradili, jak mám zajistit svoji svobodu, jak přestat být nevolníkem, jak platit pouze za to, co poptávám, jak sám rozhodovat o svém životě a majetku.
Děkuji,

Jan Ludvíček

http://pes.eunet.cz/clanky/2003/06/31231_0_0_0.html

Israeli Communications Priorities 2003

aneb navod por novinare jak a o cem psat...

http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/War/spin.htm

The SATANIC U.S. GOVERNMENT is the World’s Greatest TERRORIST ORGANIZATION

The greatest acts of terrorism are not committed by furtive gangs of masked desperados in foreign lands. The most horrific acts of terrorism in world history have always been committed by governments and their militaries.

The totally satanic military/government of the United States of America has committed massive acts of international terrorism and brutal genocide — from 1899 to the present day.

Official FBI definition of terrorism:

“Terrorism is the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.”

Even by its own definition the hypocrite U.S. government is guilty of terrorism — on a massive, international scale. And for over 100 years!

The U.S. government has broken international law and the Geneva Convention many times with its brutal use of force and horrific violence against persons and property, to intimidate and coerce governments, civilian populations, and many segments thereof, in furtherance of political, social and especially economic objectives.

“If ‘terrorism’ means ‘intimidation by violence or the threat of violence,’ and if we allow the definition to include violence by states and agents of states, then it is these, not isolated individuals or small groups, that are the important terrorists in the world.

“If terrorist violence is measured by the extent of politically motivated torture and murder, ...it is in the U.S.-sponsored and protected ‘authoritarian’ states — the real terror network — that these forms of violence have reached a high crescendo in recent decades.”

— Edward S. Herman
The Real Terror Network


“If certain acts of violation of treaties are crimes, they are crimes whether the United States does them or whether Germany [or Israel] does them, and we are not prepared to lay down a rule of criminal conduct against others which we would not be willing to have invoked against us.”

— Robert Jackson
American prosecutor
Nuremberg War-Crimes Trial
1946

If another Nuremberg war-crimes trial could be held today, America and its partners in crime would be the primary defendants. But America rules the world like a mafia, so there will be no justice until it is defeated. In the meantime, total hypocrisy and blatant double standards are the order of the day. The utterly lawless U.S. government is the biggest rogue state on Earth. Every crime of terrorism American politicians accuse other nations or groups of committing, America is itself guilty of committing, and ten thousand times more so. The genocidal United States is the hub of the real “axis of evil”.


$ American flag - swastika and stripes - symbol of American state terrorism. American terrorism is international terrorism. $

The United States Government
Committed the September 11 Attacks

In fact, our own evil government would have borne the ultimate responsibility for the disaster even if foreign terrorists actually had carried it out.

If the homicidal psychopaths of the United States military/government didn’t have the nasty habit of mass-murdering innocent civilian men, women and children around the world, there wouldn’t be anybody who wanted revenge.

But if foreign terrorists had planned and perpetrated the September 11 attacks they would have to be the best friends the U.S. government ever had. Who benefitted enormously from the carnage of September 11? The American plutocracy, the oil and weapons industries, the criminal Bush regime and its allies in the terrorist state of Israel. They had everything to gain and nothing to lose from this act of barbarism against the American people. And the evidence which has emerged since then makes it absolutely certain that the ruling elites within the U.S. military/government were indeed the ultimate authors of the September 11 attacks.

This will come as no great surprise if you are familiar with the true history of the United States. The U.S. military/government has committed several brutal genocides around the world since 1899, totalling millions of civilian men, women and children.

America’s rulers are inhuman. They have never had the slightest remorse for these horrific crimes against humanity. Once you know these basic (but heavily censored) historical/political facts of life, you will also know that America’s ruling elite have more than enough ruthlessness to slaughter thousands of American people too. The 9-11 carnage has provided the overwhelming mass-media propaganda needed by the ruling elite to sell American taxpayers on the idea of unending wars for world domination — and a police-state at home which will crush all domestic opposition.

The criminal Bush regime needs endless war to neutralize steadily growing opposition to its lawless behavior, and to carry out a long-planned military/economic takeover of the oil-rich Caspian Sea basin, Central Asia and the Middle East. This could never be accomplished without a massive corporate-media propaganda campaign to fool Americans into supporting an unending, hypocritical and utterly phony “war on terrorism”.

There is no “war on terrorism”. There is only the U.S. military/government’s perennial war of terrorism which slaughters innocent people all over the world, outside the U.S. and within it. The thousands of American people in the World Trade Center towers joined the ranks of the millions of people whom our government and military have brutally butchered for over 100 years.

The ruling elites within the U.S. military/government planned, ordered and supported the September 11 terror attacks.

Here are eleven facts, among many others, which support this conclusion:

1.

Some very revealing criminal insider trading took place on Wall Street the week before September 11, 2001. Somebody actually made millions of dollars from the death of thousands of people at the WTC. The specific type of insider trading, and the people and banks involved, provide very strong circumstantial evidence that wealthy individuals allied with the CIA had prior knowledge of the World Trade Center attack.

2.

Most revealing of all is the fact that not a single U.S. Air Force jet fighter was scrambled from Andrews Air Force Base — which is only 10 miles from the Pentagon — even a full hour after the first WTC tower was hit. Andrews AFB is charged with defending Washington D.C.’s airspace. Yet the U.S. Air Force allowed an aircraft to fly freely on an unauthorized flight path through tightly controlled airspace, descend rapidly in a tight spiral, and finally come screaming in over the treetops to slam into the Pentagon.

Definitely not acceptable behavior for an aircraft in controlled airspace over Washington D.C.

It was absolutely established, standard procedure for the U.S. Air Force and the National Guard to rapidly intercept any off-course aircraft within controlled airspaces, and to shoot them down if necessary. Therefore, somebody at the highest level of the U.S. government ordered Andrews AFB — and all the other U.S.A.F. and National Guard fighter squadrons from Boston to New York to Washington D.C. — to stand down and allow the WTC and the Pentagon to be hit. On the Army side, interestingly.

3.

The Bush regime is suppressing evidence and testimony which links the terrorist state of Israel to the 9-11 attacks.

“Evidence linking these Israelis to 9-11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It’s classified information.”

— U.S. official
quoted in Carl Cameron’s Fox News report
on the Israeli spy ring and its connections to 9-11

Not only did the Israelis have prior knowledge of the 9-11 attacks, they were closely involved in their implementation as well. Mossad is skilled in carrying out what are known as “false-flag operations” or “false-flag recruitments”. These are terror attacks which the Israelis covertly sponsor or directly commit while making it look like the work of Arabs. False-flag operations create enormous propaganda benefits that could never be acquired in any less ruthless way.

The U.S. military/government is well aware of these facts, and also of the fact that the Israeli Mossad and Shin Bet intelligence agencies have had an extensive spy network within the United States for as long as Israel has existed. Jonathan Pollard was just one of the few who were caught and punished.

Referring to Israel as “country A”, a General Accounting Office investigation stated:

“According to a U.S. intelligence agency, the government of country A conducts the most aggressive espionage operations against the U.S. of any U.S. ally.”

A very important four-part Fox News report was aired on December 11-14, 2001. It revealed that in the months prior to September 11, “as many as 140 Israelis had been detained or arrested in a secretive and sprawling investigation into suspected espionage by Israelis in the United States.” Immediately after September 11, at least 60 more Israelis were arrested or detained for questioning. The report stated:

“A handful of active Israeli military were among those detained, according to investigators, who say some of the detainees also failed polygraph questions when asked about alleged surveillance activities against and in the United States.”

The Fox News report said the investigation just prior to 9-11 found that some Israeli spies posed as “art students” who targeted and penetrated military bases, the DEA, FBI and dozens of government facilities, and even secret offices and unlisted private homes of law enforcement and intelligence personnel. The majority of those questioned stated they served in Israeli military intelligence, electronic surveillance intercept and or explosive ordinance units.”

In the first part of the report, Brit Hume asked reporter Carl Cameron:

“Carl, what about this question of advance knowledge of what was going to happen on 9-11? How clear are investigators that some Israeli agents may have known something?”

Cameron replied:

“It’s very explosive information, obviously, and there’s a great deal of evidence that they say they have collected — none of it necessarily conclusive. It’s more when they put it all together. A bigger question, they say, is how could they not have known? Almost a direct quote.”

“Comverse Infosys” is an Israeli telecommunications company with offices throughout the U.S. Comverse provides wiretapping equipment for American law enforcement agencies. U.S. government investigators strongly suspect, however, that Comverse has placed a “back door” in the equipment, through which U.S. government wiretaps can be intercepted by the Israeli government. And incredibly, the FBI and other agencies are forbidden to do anything about it! The Fox report stated:

“But investigators within the DEA, INS and FBI have all told Fox News that to pursue or even suggest Israeli spying through Comverse is considered career suicide.

“And sources say that while various FBI inquiries into Comverse have been conducted over the years, they’ve been halted before the actual equipment has ever been thoroughly tested for leaks.”

mnohem vice:

http://free.freespeech.org/americanstateterrorism/AmericanStateTerrorism.html

EU to tighten visa and passport security

EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - EU citizens will have their fingerprints stamped on their passports or undergo an iris scan as from next year, under proposals to be drawn up by the European Commission.

These measures partly stem due to a US law enacted in 2002, which will start demanding visas from EU citizens from 26 October 2004 if they do not have biometric information (fingerprints, iris scans or DNA) on their passports.

US fight against terrorism

The US will be using this biometric information in addition to existing screening processes that identify potential terrorists or criminals.

Since March 2003, US authorities have had access to most European airline passenger databases, where EU passengers are screened before they land on US soil.

The European Commission, which will present its proposals on the issue next month, stressed that these measures will not lead to a harmonised EU passport, but will only introduce similar security features.

\"The EU will not only upgrade its passports but also meet the deadline set by the US,\" the Commission spokesperson for Justice and Home Affairs told EUobserver.

The EU is also planning to introduce biometric data on visas and residence permits of third country nationals residing in the EU from next year, as a means to counter illegal immigration.

Citizens kept in the dark

Although EU heads of state and governments meeting in Greece last week gave the green light for such plans, so far there has not been any public consultation.

\"The adoption of this decision for the wholesale surveillance of peoples\' movements by the EU Council has been taken without any public consultation or debate in parliaments. The EU Council cannot legislate but its decisions are routinely translated into EU law - it is a totally undemocratic procedure,\" Tony Bunyan, editor of Statewatch, a civil liberties organisation said.

Mr Bunyan said that the aim of these measures will be to record the people\'s movements and sees it is a very poor way of countering terrorism. He is also concerned about the level of information which could be stored and who would be able to access such information.

\"What information is going to be held? We need to have a proper debate on this\", Mr Bunyan told EUobserver.

http://www.euobserver.com/index.phtml?sid=9&aid=11837