Protivojnová manifestácia v Bratislave zakázaná
[2004-03-20 22:01:31]

Starosta bratislavského Starého mesta Peter Čiernik zakázal pokojnú manifestáciu za mier v Iraku. Dnes sa pritom z iniciatívy mierových a ekologických organizácií po celom svete uskutočnili masové demonštrácie za odchod okupačných vojsk z tejto arabskej krajiny. Vládnym pravicovým politikom, lebo P. Čiernik je z KDH, však aj symbolický protest zjavne prekážal.

Demonštrácie po celom svete. V Sydney 5000 ľudí, 10 000 v gréckych Aténach a Solúni, tisíce v 90 nemeckých mestách (v Berlíne aj v hustom lejaku), niekoľko tisíc v Londýne, dokonca 120 tisíc ľudí v japonských mestách a asi 200 tisíc v Ríme (12 špeciálnych vlakov s 1500 vozňami z celého Talianska), ale aj stovky v Záhrebe, 700 vo Varšave, vyše 300 v Prahe a ďalší v Budapešti, Moskve, Ankare, Istanbule, Lisabone či Bruseli. Takto dnes vyzerali celosvetové protesty proti okupácii a vojne v Iraku. Uskutočnili sa presne rok po tom, čo USA a ich spojenci opäť zaútočili v Perzskom zálive. Uskutočnili sa preto, lebo dôvody, ktorými George Bush a jeho prívrženci zdôvodňovali novú hroznú vojnu sa ukázali ako vymyslené. Uskutočnili sa preto, lebo ani po 365 dňoch nie je v Iraku pokoj, zomierajú tam ľudia, vládne tam chudoba, hlad choroby a teror.

Ide o kontrolu ropy. „Sme presvedčení, že vojna bola hlavne zámienkou k získaniu prístupu k bohatým zásobám ropy v tejto oblasti a hájila politicko-ekonomické záujmy USA a krajín, ktoré sa podieľajú na okupácii, “ vysvetlila dôvody manifestácií po celom svete Katka Devínska zo slovenského zoskupenia Jedlo namiesto zbraní. „Diktátorský režim v Iraku bránil bohatým koncernom dostať sa k viac ako 10% svetových zásob ropy. Nechceme Husajnov režim obhajovať a ani s ním nesúhlasíme. Krajina, ktorá však po ňom zostala, nie je pripravená na plánované zmeny. Z tejto situácie budú profitovať hlavne štáty okupujúce Irak a firmy, ktoré z nich pochádzajú.“ V prejave na bratislavskom Hviezdoslavovom námestí tiež jasne zaznelo, komu Bushova politika vyhovuje: „Ropná spoločnosť Exxon Mobil sa mu odmenila finančným darom vyše milión dolárov pre jeho republikánsku stranu”.

Zákaz iba v Bratislave. Bratislavský protest prebiehal mimoriadne pokojne. Tesne pred jeho začiatkom prišli dvaja štátni policajti zisťovať, či si organizátori splnili zákonné povinnosti. Hoci bolo všetko v poriadku, legitimovali dvoch zástupcov iniciatívy Jedlo namiesto zbraní. „Preveruje sa, či nie sú medzi hľadanými osobami a tak, ” odpovedal jeden z policajtov na našu otázku, čo s ich osobnými údajmi urobia. Na otázku, prečo nepreverujú hocikoho z nás sme už odpoveď nedostali. Zaznela gitara a spev bez ozvučenia, účastníci (asi 40 pokojne stojacich mladých ľudí a ďalších 20 novinárov) si vypočuli prejav. V tom štátnych policajtov doplnili niekoľkí mestskí, starosta Peter Čiernik a mimoriadne agresívny muž. Organizátorom oznámili, že zhromaždenie je zakázané. V priebehu celého dňa sa v agentúrach neobjavila žiadna správa, že by sa niečo podobné stalo inde vo svete.

Telefonické úradovanie. Podľa zákona majú organizátori takýchto akcií ohlasovaciu povinnosť voči príslušnému obecnému úradu. Katka Devínska osobne doručila oficiálne písomné oznámenie o konaní zhromaždenia v pondelok 15. marca na miestny úrad Bratislava – Staré Mesto. Ten mal o zákaze rozhodnúť do troch dní, v opačnom prípade sa akcia môže bez problémov konať. „Doteraz sme nedostali žiadne oznámenie o zákaze, ” povedala novinárom K. Devínska. „Vyvesili sme ho na úradnej tabuli úradu a v stredu sme im telefonovali, že im ho pošleme, “ kontroval P. Čiernik. „Myslím si, že zo strany organizátorov ide o obštrukciu, možno to aj dostali, ale nechceli si zásielku prebrať.“ Lenže zákon žiadne telefonáty neuznáva a obštrukciu organizátori nepripúšťajú. Celý čas sa aj voči policajtom správali až neskutočne slušne.

Ako za čias ŠtB. Práve opačne sa choval neznámy muž v modrej riflovej bunde s vysielačkou v ruke. Na každú našu otázku sa obracal chrbtom, organizátorom prikazoval, aby „okamžite“ zvesili transparent a v ruke schovával údajnú kópiu zákazu. Údaje z nej diktoval policajtom a potom sa podľa vlastných slov vybral na úrad pre originál. „Vrátim sa o päť minút, dám im ho a keď do ďalších piatich [minút] nezmiznú strhnite im to a rozožente ich, ” dirigoval policajtov muž, ktorý bol s najväčšou pravdepodobnosťou podriadeným Petra Čiernika. K. Devínska sa chcela vyhnúť konfrontácii a tak rozhodnutie o zákaze oznámila všetkým prítomným a vyhlásila koniec manifestácie.

Králik: stiahnuť našich vojakov. P. Čiernik nám tvrdil, že manifestáciu zakázali kvôli vlastnej „kultúrnej akcii“, ktorá sa uskutočnila v rovnakom čase o 30-50 metrov ďalej. Akcia pozostávala z postávania asi 30 ľudí a niekoľkých Čiernikových podriadených okolo veľkej šachovnice. Medzi oboma skupinami bolo niekoľko metrov voľného priestoru a v žiadnom prípade si neprekážali. Smiešna výhovorka hodná zbabelého politika. Pravičiari musia mať naozaj veľký strach zo slobodne prejavených názorov, keď takto obmedzujú aj malé alternatívne skupinky. Na druhej strane je zjavné, že vojna v Iraku je citlivou témou aj u nás. Ľavicový prezidentský kandidát Ján Králik včera vyhlásil, že hneď po svojom prípadnom zvolení by zvolal najvyšších ústavných činiteľov, aby ich presvedčil o potrebe stiahnutia slovenských vojakov z Iraku. Včerajší protest organizácie Greenpeace a dnešný protest Mierovej iniciatívy 20. marca a združenia Jedlo namiesto zbraní dokazujú, že takýto názor má aj mnoho mladých Slovákov.

Jakub Topol
http://www.lavica.sk/?dzial=sk&id=123

FBI naslouchá
Větvička Václav - vet, 22.03.2004, 00:00:00, Zprávy
O tom, že americké bezpečností složky využívají antiteroristických zákonů k získání maximálního dohledu nad internetovým provozem, není pochyb. Proto nejnovější snaha už nikoho ani nepřekvapuje.
FBI totiž připravila požadavek, podle kterého by v případě jeho schválení museli všichni provideři rychlého internetového spojení přepracovat své sítě tak, aby policie či tajné služby měly okamžitý přístup ke všem internetovým komunikacím, tedy od elektronické pošty přes VoIP až po instant messaging či onlinové hry. Jakákoliv nová internetová služba, která by nebyla vybavena zadními dvířky pro policejní přístup, by byla v novém zákoně brána jako ilegální.

Telefonní společnosti již spadají pod zákon CALEA, který přesně definuje povinnosti těchto společností ve chvíli, kdy policie požádá o odposlech nebo o elektronický dohled. Podle předloženého zákona by pod CALEA spadaly i společnosti poskytující kabelové, satelitní a DSL spojení.
http://swnet.cz/index.php?ID=19957

Mossad And 911
3-20-4


The following article is worth another look...

United Press International September 26, 2001

RAWALPINDI, Pakistan -- The retired Pakistani general who is closest to the Taliban and Osama bin Laden contends the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on New York City and Washington were the work of renegade U.S. Air Force elements working with the Israelis. Gen. Hameed Gul led Pakistan's Inter Services Intelligence during the war against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Gul serves as an adviser to Pakistan's extremist religious political parties, which oppose their government's decision to support the United States in any action against Afghanistan's Taliban regime. Gul contends bin Laden had nothing to do with the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, saying instead that they were the work of the Mossad, the Israeli intelligence service -- a version of events that has been endorsed by Islamic fundamentalist clerics and is widely accepted by Muslims throughout the Arab world.

Here is the transcript of the exclusive interview Gul gave to Arnaud de Borchgrave, United Press International editor at large:



De Borchgrave: So who did Black Sept. 11?

Gul: Mossad and its accomplices. The U.S. spends $40 billion a year on its 11 intelligence agencies. That's $400 billion in 10 years. Yet the Bush Administration says it was taken by surprise. I don't believe it. Within 10 minutes of the second twin tower being hit in the World Trade Center CNN said Osama bin Laden had done it. That was a planned piece of disinformation by the real perpetrators. It created an instant mindset and put public opinion into a trance, which prevented even intelligent people from thinking for themselves.



Q: So you're already convinced bin Laden didn't do it?

A: I know bin Laden and his associates. I've been with them here, in Europe and the Middle East. They are graduates of the best universities and are highly intelligent with impressive degrees and speak impeccable English. These are people who have rediscovered fundamental Islamic values. Many come from the Gulf countries where ruling royal families have generated hatred by the way they flout divine law, wasting billions on gratifying their whims, jetting around in large private jets by themselves, and sailing the Mediterranean in big private boats for weeks on end. Osama's best recruits come from feudal areas that are U.S. protectorates and where millions of poor people are seeking human dignity. I have even visited a Christian convent school in Murree, 60 miles from here, where my 13-year-old daughter is studying. The young girls there have told me Osama is their hero. Osama's followers identify with Mujahideen freedom fighters wherever they are defending Islam and its values.



Q: So what makes you think Osama wasn't behind Sept. 11?

A: From a cave inside a mountain or a peasant's hovel? Let's be serious. Osama inspires countless millions by standing up for Islam against American and Israeli imperialism. He doesn't have the means for such a sophisticated operation.



Q: Why Mossad?

A: Mossad and its American associates are the obvious culprits. Who benefits from the crime? The attacks against the twin towers started at 8:45 a.m. and four flights are diverted from their assigned air space and no air traffic controller sounds the alarm. And no Air Force jets scramble until 10 a.m. That also smacks of a small scale Air Force rebellion, a coup against the Pentagon perhaps? Radars are jammed, transponders fail. No IFF -- friend or foe identification -- challenge. In Pakistan, if there is no response to IFF, jets are instantly scrambled and the aircraft is shot down with no further questions asked. This was clearly an inside job. Bush was afraid and rushed to the shelter of a nuclear bunker. He clearly feared a nuclear situation. Who could that have been? Will that also be hushed up in the investigation, like the Warren report after the Kennedy assassination?



Q: At this point, someone might be asking what you've been smoking. What is Israel's interest in such a monstrous plot, which, of course, no one believes except Islamist extremists who concocted this piece of disinformation in the first place, presumably to detract from the real culprits?

A: Jews never agreed to Bush 41 (George H.W. Bush, the 41st president) or 43 (his son George W. Bush, the 43rd president). They made sure Bush senior didn't get a second term. His land-for-peace pressure in Palestine didn't suit Israel. They were also against the young Bush because he was considered too close to oil interests and the Gulf countries. Bush senior and Jim Baker had raised $150 million for Bush junior, much of it from Mideast sources or their American go-betweens. Bush 41 and Baker, as private citizens, had also facilitated the new strategic relationship between Saudi Arabia and Iran. I have this from sources in both countries. So clearly the prospect of a Bush 43 was a potential danger to Israel.

Jews were stunned by the way Bush stole the election in Florida. They had put big money on Al Gore. Israel has given its imperialist guardian parent opportunities to turn disaster into a pretext for imposing an all-encompassing military, political and economic agenda to further the cause of global capitalism. While Colin Powell is cautious and others are reckless and want to make up for their failure to defeat Saddam Hussein in the Gulf War 10 years ago, the global agenda is the same.

Israel knows it has a short shelf-life before it is overwhelmed by demographics. It is a state that was born in terrorism that terrorized Palestinians into the exile of refugee camps, where they have now subsisted in squalid refugee camps, and is now very much afraid of Pakistan's nuclear capability.

Israel has now handed the Bush family the opportunity it has been waiting for to consolidate America's imperial grip on the Gulf and acquire control of the Caspian basin by extending its military presence in Central Asia. Bush conveniently overlooks -- or is not told -- the fact that Islamic fundamentalists got their big boost in the modern age as CIA assets in the covert campaign I was also involved with to force the Soviets out of Afghanistan. Bush senior was vice president during that entire campaign. And no sooner did he become president on Jan. 20, 1989, than he summoned an inter-agency intelligence meeting and issued an order, among several others, to clip the wings of ISI (Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence) that had been coordinating the entire operation in Afghanistan. I know this firsthand as I was DGISI at the time (director general, ISI).

...

Q: Back to Osama's terrorist network. Who was behind the bombing of the U.S. Embassies in Tanzania and Kenya?

A: Mossad is strong in both countries. Remember the Israeli operation to free hostages in Entebbe (Uganda)? Both Kenya and Tanzania were part of the logistical tail. A so-called associate of Osama was framed at Karachi airport. The incidents took place on Aug. 8, 1999, and on the 10th a short, clean-shaven man disembarks at Karachi airport and presents the passport of a bearded man. Not your passport, he was told. He then tries to bribe the clerk with 200 rupees. A ludicrously small sum given the circumstances. The clerk says no and turns him in and he starts singing right away. Not plausible. Osama has sworn to me on the Koran it was not him and he is truthful to a fault. Pious Muslims do not kill innocent civilians who included many Muslim victims. The passport must have been switched while the man was asleep on the plane in what has all the earmarks of a Mossad operation. For 10 years, the Mujahideen fought the Soviets in Afghanistan and not a single Soviet embassy was touched anywhere in the world. So this could not have been Osama's followers.



Q: What if bin Laden has been lying to you and is guilty. Is that inconceivable?

A: If Taliban are given irrefutable evidence of his guilt, I am in favor of a fair trial. In America, one is entitled to a jury of peers. But he has no American peers. The Taliban would not object, in the event of a prima face case, to an international Islamic court meeting in The Hague. They would in turn extradite Osama to the Netherlands.

http://www.konformist.com/911/mossad-911.htm

...

When Kerry rose before the Senate on Jan. 11, 1991, to explain his vote against the Gulf War resolution, he charged that the George H.W. Bush administration had done too little to involve the rest of the world in its campaign to oust Iraq from Kuwait.

"Can it really be said that we are building a new world order when it is almost exclusively the United States who will be fighting in the desert, not alone but almost, displaying pride and impatience and implementing what essentially amounts to a pax Americana?" he asked. "Is that a new world order?"

Eleven years later, when Kerry discussed the resolution for last year's war against Iraq, his opinion of Bush's father's efforts had changed: He praised the coalition that had been formed for the Gulf War, in part to complain that the current president had thus far failed to secure the same level of cooperation.

...

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4570689/

Iraq demands a new world order

Tony Blair's call deserves our support

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/comment/0,12956,1163905,00.html

drifter 20.03.2004-12:39:22

toto je imho stale aktualnejsie! (kapitola z What Uncle Sam Really Wants od
Noam Chomsky)


War is Peace.

Freedom is Slavery.

Ignorance is Strength.



The terms of political discourse typically have two meanings. One is the dictionary meaning, and the other is a meaning that is useful for serving power -- the doctrinal meaning.

Take democracy. According to the common-sense meaning, a society is democratic to the extent that people can participate in a meaningful way in managing their affairs. But the doctrinal meaning of democracy is different -- it refers to a system in which decisions are made by sectors of the business community and related elites. The public are to be only "spectators of action," not "participants," as leading democratic theorists (in this case, Walter Lippmann) have explained. They are permitted to ratify the decisions of their betters and to lend their support to one or another of them, but not to interfere with matters -- like public policy -- that are none of their business.

If segments of the public depart from their apathy and begin to organize and enter the public arena, that's not democracy. Rather, it's a crisis of democracy in proper technical usage, a threat that has to be overcome in one or another way: in El Salvador, by death squads -- at home, by more subtle and indirect means.

Or take free enterprise, a term that refers, in practice, to a system of public subsidy and private profit, with massive government intervention in the economy to maintain a welfare state for the rich. In fact, in acceptable usage, just about any phrase containing the word "free" is likely to mean something like the opposite of its actual meaning.

Or take defense against aggression, a phrase that's used -- predictably -- to refer to aggression. When the US attacked South Vietnam in the early 1960s, the liberal hero Adlai Stevenson (among others) explained that we were defending South Vietnam against "internal aggression" -- that is, the aggression of South Vietnamese peasants against the US air force and a US-run mercenary army, which were driving them out of their homes and into concentration camps where they could be "protected" from the southern guerrillas. In fact, these peasants willingly supported the guerillas, while the US client regime was an empty shell, as was agreed on all sides.

So magnificently has the doctrinal system risen to its task that to this day, 30 years later, the idea that the US attacked South Vietnam is unmentionable, even unthinkable, in the mainstream. The essential issues of the war are, correspondingly, beyond any possibility of discussion now. The guardians of political correctness (the real PC) can be quite proud of an achievement that would be hard to duplicate in a well-run totalitarian state.

Or take the term peace process. The naive might think that it refers to efforts to seek peace. Under this meaning, we would say that the peace process in the Middle East includes, for example, the offer of a full peace treaty to Israel by President Sadat of Egypt in 1971, along lines advocated by virtually the entire world, including official US policy; the Security Council resolution of January 1976 introduced by the major Arab states with the backing of the PLO, which called for a two-state settlement of the Arab-Israel conflict in the terms of a near-universal international consensus; PLO offers through the 1980s to negotiate with Israel for mutual recognition; and annual votes at the UN General Assembly, most recently in December 1990 (voted 144-2), calling for an international conference on the Israel-Arab problem, etc.

But the sophisticated understand that these efforts do not form part of the peace process. The reason is that in the PC meaning, the term peace process refers to what the US government is doing -- in the cases mentioned, this is to block international efforts to seek peace. The cases cited do not fall within the peace process, because the US backed Israel's rejection of Sadat's offer, vetoed the Security Council resolution, opposed negotiations and mutual recognition of the PLO and Israel, and regularly joins with Israel in opposing -- thereby, in effect, vetoing -- any attempt to move towards a peaceful diplomatic settlement at the UN or elsewhere.

The peace process is restricted to US initiatives, which call for a unilateral US-determined settlement with no recognition of Palestinian national rights. That's the way it works. Those who cannot master these skills must seek another profession.

There are many other examples. Take the term special interest. The well-oiled Republican PR systems of the 1980s regularly accused the Democrats of being the party of the special interests: women, labor, the elderly, the young, farmers -- in short, the general population. There was only one sector of the population never listed as a special interest: corporations and business generally. That makes sense. In PC discourse their (special) interests are the national interest, to which all must bow.

The Democrats plaintively retorted that they were not the party of the special interests: they served the national interest too. That was correct, but their problem has been that they lack the single-minded class consciousness of their Republican opponents. The latter are not confused about their role as representatives of the owners and managers of the society, who are fighting a bitter class war against the general population -- often adopting vulgar Marxist rhetoric and concepts, resorting to jingoist hysteria, fear and terror, awe of great leaders and the other standard devices of population control. The Democrats are less clear about their allegiances, hence less effective in the propaganda wars.

Finally, take the term conservative, which has come to refer to advocates of a powerful state, which interferes massively in the economy and in social life. They advocate huge state expenditures and a postwar peak of protectionist measures and insurance against market risk, narrowing individual liberties through legislation and court-packing, protecting the Holy State from unwarranted inspection by the irrelevant citizenry -- in short, those programs that are the precise opposite of traditional conservatism. Their allegiance is to "the people who own the country" and therefore "ought to govern it," in the words of Founding Father John Jay.

It's really not that hard, once one understands the rules.

To make sense of political discourse, it's necessary to give a running translation into English, decoding the doublespeak of the media, academic social scientists and the secular priesthood generally. Its function is not obscure: the effect is to make it impossible to find words to talk about matters of human significance in a coherent way. We can then be sure that little will be understood about how our society works and what is happening in the world -- a major contribution to democracy, in the PC sense of the word.

:)

http://www.english.upenn.edu/~jlynch/Frank/People/weishaup.html

CIA and freemasons among dark forces in Europe: an exclusive JUST Response report from the Dougal Watt Dossier

http://www.justresponse.net/DougalWatt20Aug02.html

Polský euroskeptik potrestán
(20.3.04)

Soud odsoudil Lukasze Kolaka z Gdyně k měsíci veřejných prací za to, že na zastávce autobusu vylepil plakát proti Evropské unii.

Jak už to v takových případech bývá, v soudním rozhodnutí se nepraví nic o tom, že by důvodem byl plakát proti EU. Přestupek spočíval ve vylepení plakátu bez povolení majitele zastávky (dříve se tomu říkalo "poškozování socialistického majetku").

Jistě se stalo jen shodou okolností, že na téže zastávce byl také vylepen plakát PRO Evropskou unii, za jehož vylepení nikdo potrestán nebyl.

Pan Kolak se odvolal.

Soud s pomýleným, který odmítá vidět světlé zítřky, bude pokračovat 13. dubna.

Zdroj: http://intermarium.webpark.pl/kolak.html

Secrets and ties of the Bonesmen

http://news.scotsman.com/features.cfm?id=315162004

...

The plug has been pulled on Cloak and Dagger, Toronto's top-rated, late-night conspiracy radio talk show. Not surprisingly, its producers are claiming it's all a conspiracy.

Independent producer Nelson Thall says he was notified by MOJO 640 program director Scott Armstrong last week that the station (CFMJ) had decided to replace Cloak and Dagger -- the highest-rated show in its Thursday, 11 p.m. to 2 a.m., time slot, according to the Bureau of Broadcast Measurement -- with a comedy show.

But Thall isn't buying the official rationale. He thinks the show, which explores alleged conspiracies that include the assassinations of John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr., the deaths of John F. Kennedy Jr. and Princess Diana, and the events of Sept. 11, 2001, was "upsetting people in high places."

"I'm a modern-day Howard Beale," he said, alluding to the star of the 1976 movie Network. "They killed my show because our ratings are too high. We did our job too well, revealing state secrets the shadow government doesn't want you to know."

Indeed, he goes further. Thall says he spoke last week with former U.S. vice-president Al Gore, who told him that George W. Bush -- one of Cloak and Dagger's frequent targets -- had told Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin to take the show off the air.

According to Thall: "When Martin met Bush at Monterrey in Mexico last month, Bush told him he would not sign any agreement about oil concessions to Canada unless he got rid of Cloak and Dagger."

...

http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20040207/MOJO07

"The Transportation Security Administration said Wednesday it will order airlines to turn over passengers' personal records in the next couple of months to test a computerized passenger screening program that could keep dangerous people off airlines, reports Yahoo/AP. The Computer-Assisted Passenger Prescreening System, or CAPPS II, would rank all air passengers according to the likelihood of their being terrorists. Suspected terrorists and violent criminals would be designated as red and forbidden to fly. Passengers who raise questions would be classified as yellow and would receive extra security screening. The vast majority would be designated green and allowed through routine screening. But some say the project would violate privacy rights, while others are concerned it would cost the private sector too much money. The Air Transport Association, the trade group for major airlines, has come up with seven 'privacy principles' that it says the government should follow in implementing CAPPS II."

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/03/18/2326218

Rumsfeld Caught Lying, Yet Again, On "Face the Nation." But This Time, a Journalist Actually Threw It In His Face.

A BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS

Thanks to David Sirota of the Center for American Progress for spotting and forwarding this excerpt in which Rumsfeld is caught in a brazen lie by Bob Schieffer of CBS. Sirota also suggests seeing this [LINK] for further proof of Rumsfeld's lie on "Face the Nation."
Excerpt from "Face the Nation":

SCHIEFFER: Well, let me just ask you this. If they did not have these weapons of mass destruction, though, granted all of that is true, why then did they pose an immediate threat to us, to this country?

Sec. RUMSFELD: Well, you're the--you and a few other critics are the only people I've heard use the phrase `immediate threat.' I didn't. The president didn't. And it's become kind of folklore that that's--that's what's happened. The president went...

SCHIEFFER: You're saying that nobody in the administration said that.

Sec. RUMSFELD: I--I can't speak for nobody--everybody in the administration and say nobody said that.

SCHIEFFER: Vice president didn't say that? The...

Sec. RUMSFELD: Not--if--if you have any citations, I'd like to see 'em.

Mr. FRIEDMAN: We have one here. It says `some have argued that the nu'--this is you speaking--`that the nuclear threat from Iraq is not imminent, that Saddam is at least five to seven years away from having nuclear weapons. I would not be so certain.'

Sec. RUMSFELD: And--and...

Mr. FRIEDMAN: It was close to imminent.

Sec. RUMSFELD: Well, I've--I've tried to be precise, and I've tried to be accurate. I'm s--suppose I've...

Mr. FRIEDMAN: `No terrorist state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the security of our people and the stability of the world and the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq.'

Sec. RUMSFELD: Mm-hmm. It--my view of--of the situation was that he--he had--we--we believe, the best intelligence that we had and other countries had and that--that we believed and we still do not know--we will know.

A BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS

See: [CBS Interview Link for "Face the Nation" (.pdf file)] http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/face_031404.pdf

http://www.buzzflash.com/analysis/04/03/ana04004.html

The Bushes' New World Disorder

Free Press International


The Boston Globe 3/16/2004


"IT MUST BE considered that there is nothing more difficult to carry out, nor more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to handle, than to initiate a new order of things." This warning is from Niccolo Machiavelli, yet it has never had sharper resonance.

More than a decade ago, after Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait, President George H. W. Bush explicitly sought to initiate, as he put it to Congress, a "new world order." He made that momentous declaration on Sept. 11, 1990. Eleven years later, the suddenly mystical date of 9/11 motivated his son to finish what the father began. A year ago this week, Bush the younger launched a war against the man who tried to kill his dad, initiating the opposite of order.

The situation hardly needs rehearsing. In Iraq, many thousands are dead, including 564 Americans. Civil war threatens. Afghanistan, meanwhile, is choked by drug-running warlords. Islamic jihadists have been empowered. The nuclear profiteering of Pakistan has been exposed but not necessarily stopped. Al Qaeda's elusiveness has reinforced its mythic malevolence. The Atlantic Alliance is in ruins. The United States has never been more isolated. A pattern of deception has destroyed its credibility abroad and at home. Disorder spreads from Washington to Israel to Haiti to Spain. Whether the concern is subduing resistance fighters far away or making Americans feel safer, the Pentagon's unprecedented military dominance, the costs of which stifle the US economy, is shown to be essentially impotent.

In America, the new order of things is defined mainly by the sour taste of moral hangover, how the emotional intensity of the 9/11 trauma -- anguished but pure -- dissolved into a feeling of being trapped in a cage of our own making. As the carnage in Madrid makes clear, the threats in the world are real and dangerous to handle, but one US initiative after another has escalated rather than diffused such threats. Instead of replacing chaos with new order, our nation's responses inflict new wounds that increase the chaos. We strike at those whom we perceive as aiming to do us harm but without actually defending ourselves. And most unsettling of all, in our attempt to get the bad people to stop threatening us, we have begun to imitate them.

The most important revelation of the Iraq war has been of the Bush administration's blatant contempt for fact. Whether defined as "lying" or not, the clear manipulation of intelligence ahead of last year's invasion has been completely exposed. The phrase "weapons of mass destruction" has been transformed. Where once it evoked the grave danger of a repeat of the 9/11 trauma, now it evokes an apparently calculated American fear. The government laid out explicit evidence defining a threat that required the launching of preventive war, and the US media trumpeted that evidence without hesitation. The result, since there were no weapons of mass destruction, as the government and a pliant press had ample reason to know, was an institutionalized deceit maintained to this day. At the United Nations, the United States misled the world. In speech after speech, President Bush misled Congress and the nation. And note that the word "misled" means both to have falsified and to have failed in leadership. To mislead, as the tautological George Bush might put it, is to mislead.

The repetition of falsehoods tied to the war on terrorism and the war against Iraq has eroded the American capacity, if not to tell the difference between what is true and what is a lie, then to think the difference matters much. The administration distorted fact ahead of the invasion, when the American people could not refute what had not happened yet. And the administration distorts fact now, when the American people do not remember clearly what we were told a year ago. That Bush retains the confidence of a sizable proportion of the electorate suggests that Americans don't particularly worry anymore about truth as a guiding principle of their government.

In that lies the irony. The Bush dynasty has in fact initiated a new order of things. The United States of America has become its own opposite, a nation of triumphant freedom that claims the right to restrain the freedom of others; a nation of a structured balance of power that destroys the balance of power abroad; a nation of creative enterprise that exports a smothering banality; and above all, a nation of forcefully direct expression that disrespects the truth. Whatever happens from this week forward in Iraq, the main outcome of the war for the United States is clear. We have defeated ourselves.

http://www.freepressinternational.com/new_world_disorder.html

JAXXE: Jaxxe ukazalo, tak vetsina lidi neumi premyslet, kinda sad...

The Meaning of Madrid

The road to World War IV

http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=13966

problem - reakce - reseni

jak jednoduche...

Část svobody by za bezpečnost vyměnilo přes 60 % Čechů

foto: Novinky



Policisté jsou od středy v plné pohotovosti. V České republice začala naplno platit bezpečnostní opatření přijatá po teroristických útocích v Madridu. Z exkluzivního průzkumu agentury STEM pro deník Právo vyplývá, že část své svobody je za větší bezpečnost ochotno obětovat více než 60 procent lidí.
18.3. 03:00

PRAHA - Ochota podle průzkumu roste společně s věkem lidí. Častěji by se tak svých svobod vzdali lidé starší 60 let, méně často pak lidé ve věku od 18 do 29 let. I těch je však většina. Hrozbu terorismu jako důvod ke ztrátě části svobod naproti tomu nevidí 38,8 procenta lidí. Ředitel STEM Jan Hartl v deníku Právo upozorňuje, že výzkum nelze vykládat tak, že veřejnost volá po policejním státu.

"Lidé si to vždycky představují tak, že by opatření spíš omezila ty ostatní, a ne je. Klima je takové, že rozumně míněná opatření by mohla ministru (vnitra Stanislavu) Grossovi projít," řekl Hartl. STEM poprvé zaznamenal tendenci, podle níž jsou lidé ochotni omezit si některé svobody, po teroristických útocích v USA 11. září 2001.
Většina odmítá volnější odposlechy

Gross a další vládní činitelé po akcích teroristů v Madridu hovoří o nutnosti přijetí tzv. antiteroristického zákona, který by zvýšil moc zpravodajských služeb. Diskutuje se např. o uvolnění legislativy ohledně odposlechů či o možnosti vypnout mobilní sítě v případě ohrožení.

Jen necelá pětina dotázaných (19,6 %) se domnívá, že jsou české tajné služby schopny případný teroristický útok předem odhalit. Téměř polovina (47,8 %) si myslí, že nikoli, a necelá třetina (32,5 %) nedokázala odpovědět.

Další data průzkumu STEM částečně odpovídají na otázku, jaká omezení mají lidé na mysli. Velká většina z nich (79,7 %) by souhlasila, aby bylo na ulicích a veřejných prostranstvích v souvislosti s terorismem instalováno více průmyslových kamer. Proti je 20,3 procenta. Respondenti by také většinou souhlasili se zpřísněním kontrol na hranicích, byť by se týkaly nejen cizinců, ale i českých občanů. Kladně se vyjádřilo 77,8 procenta, proti bylo 22,2 procenta.

Exkluzivní průzkum agentury STEM pro Právo

Souhlasil/a byste v souvislosti s nebezpečím terorismu s omezením části svých zákonných svobod? (v %)
Spíše ano 43,3
Určitě ano 17,9
Určitě ne 14,0
Spíše ne 24,8
.: ANKETA :.
Hlasujte v anketě na konci článku.

Obáváte se teroristického útoku na území České republiky? (v %)
Ano 59
Ne 41

Myslíte si, že české tajné služby jsou schopny případný teroristický útok předem odhalit? (v %)
Ano 19,6
Ne 47,8
Neví 32,5

Souhlasíte s tím, aby v souvislosti s terorismem bylo instalováno více průmyslových kamer na ulicích a veřejných prostranstvích? (v %)
Ano 79,7
Ne 20,3

Souhlasíte s tím, aby v souvislosti s terorismem bezpečnostní orgány prováděly odposlechy i bez povolení soudu? (v %)
Ano 39,6
Ne 60,4

Souhlasíte s tím, aby v souvislosti s terorismem bezpečnostní orgány prováděly kontroly bankovních účtů i bez povolení soudu? (v %)
Ano 46,6
Ne 53,4

Souhlasíte s tím, aby se v souvislosti s terorismem zpřísnila na hranicích kontrola nejen cizinců, ale i českých občanů? (v %)
Ano 77,8
Ne 22,2

http://www.novinky.cz/02/79/83.html

Americká vojska prý "vykládala v Iráku zbraně hromadného ničení"

Američtí vojáci prý vykládali v jižních iráckých přístavech velký náklad starých vojenských součástek, z nichž by bylo možno zkonstruovat dalekonosné střely a zbraně hromadného ničení, tvrdí íránský list Tehran Times, ZDE.

Upozornily na to stránky Axis of Logic , které se soustřeďují na shromaž'dování světových zpráv, jaké většinou v hlavních sdělovacích prostředcích zapadnou.

Údajný "spolehlivý zdroj" v Irácké správní radě sdělil tiskové kanceláři Mehr, že se prý přitom americké jednotky, jimž pomáhali i britští vojáci, silně snažili toto vykládání utajit. Náklad byl prý dovezly uprostřed noci civilní lodi. Skládal se ze zbraní vyrobených v osmdesátých a v devadesátých letech. Některé vykládané zbraně jsou prý podobné zbraním, jaké prodávaly Spojené státy Iráku v letech 1980-1988. Většina zbraní však prý byla údajně východoevropského původu a některé součástky pocházely ze Sovětského svazu.

Mluvčí amerických okupačních jednotek v Iráku sdělil tiskové kanceláři Mehr, že nemá žádné informace o tomto vykládání starých zbraní.

http://blisty.cz/2004/3/18/art17366.html

JAXXE --- --- 14:55:27 15.3.2004

Madrid: útoky byly "selháním, bomby měly vybuchnout v tunelu"

Poukázal na to Leopoldo Sagui, který žije nedaleko železniční stanice, odkud vyjely madridské vlaky, které se staly terčem atentátu:

Bydlím v Alcala Henares, v městě nedaleko Madridu, kde teroristé umístili bomby do vlaků. Náklaďák s výbušninami byl nalezen 100 metrů od mého domu. Útok na vlaky ve Španělsku selhal. V důsledku opravářských prací u vjezdu do stanice Atocha měly vlaky zpoždění několika minut.

Teroristé naprogramovali bomby podle oficiálního jizdního řádu. Stanice Atocha je vjezdem do šest kilometrů dlouhého tunelu, v němž jsou dvě podzemní stanice.

Alespoň tři z oněch čtyř vlaků měly explodovat v tunelu. V tom případě by nepřežil téměř nikdo. Každého rána dopravuje každý vlak 2000 - 2500 lidí. Cílem hyen bylo usmrtit 8000 - 10000.

Devadesát procent Španělů bylo proti útoku na Irák. Aznarova vláda trvala po mnoho hodin, že za útoky nese odpovědnost ETA, byla to nesmyslná hypotéza. Víc se dočtete ve španělském zdroji ZDE, poznamenává autor dopisu.

http://blisty.cz/2004/3/18/art17367.html