BREAKING: Discover How A Slacker Makes $100,000 A Year!

WEBMASTERS! Get Your Website To The Top Of Google

Pelosi did not object to waterboarding

Monday, December 10th, 2007

Secretly briefed, Pelosi did not object to waterboarding in 2002

Pelosi would later boot sole objector to program from chance to chair Intelligence Committee

John ByrneTwo senior Republicans and Democrats in Congress — including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi — were briefing on the CIA’s program to use waterboarding on terror suspects in September 2002 and did not object, according to Sunday’s Washington Post.

In the long-ranging article, which seemingly takes the lawmakers and the Bush Administration to task by discussing the practice’s emergence in Nazi Germany and other totalitarian states, a Pelosi aide said the Speaker remembered discussion of “enhanced” interrogation techniques and “acknowledged that Pelosi did not raise objections at the time.”

“In September 2002, four members of Congress met in secret for a first look at a unique CIA program designed to wring vital information from reticent terrorism suspects in U.S. custody,” the Post wrote. “For more than an hour, the bipartisan group, which included current House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), was given a virtual tour of the CIA’s overseas detention sites and the harsh techniques interrogators had devised to try to make their prisoners talk.”

“Among the techniques described, said two officials present, was waterboarding, a practice that years later would be condemned as torture by Democrats and some Republicans on Capitol Hill,” the Post added. “But on that day, no objections were raised. Instead, at least two lawmakers in the room asked the CIA to push harder, two U.S. officials said.”

Democrats have since been vehement critics of the practice, piggybacking on public outrage to a practice many have described as torture — including 2008 Republican presidential candidate John McCain (R-AZ) who was tortured in the Vietnam War.

Only Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA) — then the second-ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee who would supplant Pelosi in 2003 — formally objected. Harman, who was set to lead the House Intelligence Committee when the Democrats retook the chamber in 2006, was pushed aside by Pelosi when she took over as Speaker, in what was seen as an element of personal rivalry.

“Harman, who replaced Pelosi as the committee’s top Democrat in January 2003, disclosed Friday that she filed a classified letter to the CIA in February of that year as an official protest about the interrogation program,” the Post notes. “Harman said she had been prevented from publicly discussing the letter or the CIA’s program because of strict rules of secrecy.”

“When you serve on intelligence committee you sign a second oath — one of secrecy,” she said. “I was briefed, but the information was closely held to just the Gang of Four. I was not free to disclose anything.”

None of the other lawmakers briefed raised formal objections. Those lawmakers included former Sen. Bob Graham (D-FL), former Sen. John Rockefeller IV (D-WV), former Rep. Porter Goss (R-FL) and Sen. Pat Roberts (R-KN).

“Individual lawmakers’ recollections of the early briefings varied dramatically, but officials present during the meetings described the reaction as mostly quiet acquiescence, if not outright support,” the Post added. ‘Among those being briefed, there was a pretty full understanding of what the CIA was doing,’ said Goss, who chaired the House intelligence committee from 1997 to 2004 and then served as CIA director from 2004 to 2006. ‘And the reaction in the room was not just approval, but encouragement.’”

Read the full Post story here.

Have Your Say: Pelosi did not object to waterboarding
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

White House clams up on CIA cover-up

Monday, December 10th, 2007

The White House said Monday it would not answer questions about the CIA’s destroying interrogation tapes of terrorism suspects, citing ongoing investigations into what some have called a cover-up.

Spokesman Dana Perino said that President George W Bush’s official lawyer had requested a no-comment policy while the Justice Department and Central Intelligence Agency looked into the simmering controversy.

“Until that process works itself out, I’m going to adhere to their request,” she told reporters. “I think that that’s appropriate, and I’ll adhere to it.”

When a reporter noted that the White House has similarly stonewalled questions about other potentially embarrassing issues, and suggested that such a policy was politically expedient, Perino bristled.

“I can see why that cynicism that usually drifts from this room could come up in this regard. What I can tell you is that I try my best to get you as much information as I can, and in this regard I’ve been asked by our Counsel’s office not to comment, and I’m not going to,” she said.

But she repeated that Bush had no recollection of being told about the tapes or about their destruction in 2005 until briefed last week following media reports.

Some of Bush’s Democratic critics and human rights groups have denounced the decision as an attempt to cover up interrogation practices widely seen as torture — despite Washington’s insistence that it does not torture.

The videotapes, made in 2002, reportedly showed harsh interrogations of Abu Zubaydah and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, who were among the first suspects interrogated by the CIA after the Sept 11, 2001 attacks.

CIA director Michael Hayden, who was not leading the agency when the tapes were destroyed, has said that doing so was necessary to avoid having the recordings leak to the public, revealing the identity of CIA questioners.

(AFP)

Have Your Say: White House clams up on CIA cover-up
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Did White House Censor Science?

Monday, December 10th, 2007

CLAYTON SANDELL

House Democrats and Republicans traded rhetoric Monday over a new report claiming White House officials sought to suppress scientific views of global warming that clashed with Bush administration policies.

The report — originally undertaken as a bipartisan effort — leads to what the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee calls an “inescapable” conclusion that “the Bush administration has engaged in a systematic effort to manipulate climate change science and mislead policymakers and the public about the dangers of global warming.”

The report is the result of a 16-month investigation by the committee, chaired by Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif. Republicans on the committee quickly dismissed the report as a “political attack” and issued their own findings that question the Democrats’ conclusions and investigative methods. The White House called the allegations untrue.

One of the issues addressed in the report released by the Democratic majority is whether the White House Council on Environmental Quality, or CEQ, required approval of all media requests to interview government climate scientists.

The report states that “by controlling which government scientists could respond to media inquiries, the White House and agency political appointees suppressed dissemination of scientific views that could conflict with administration policies.”

The report repeatedly cites the testimony of Kent Laborde, a career public affairs officer at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Laborde told the committee that the White House CEQ insisted on approving all news media requests to interview NOAA climate scientists — a practice Laborde said has only recently ended.

“According to Mr. Laborde,” the report said, “climate change was considered a high-profile issue, and anything that was very high profile, anything that related to policy, anything that particularly related to a current policy debate or policy deliberation’ had to be routed through CEQ for approval.”

White House approval for interviews with journalists became more prevalent after Hurricane Katrina hit in 2005, according to the report; scientists who denied a link between stronger hurricanes and global warming were given approval over scientists who suggested such a link.

Laborde told the committee that climate change seemed to be the only topic that garnered this special attention by the White House, and if the CEQ disapproved of an interview, “it would have not gone forward.”

The Republican minority report criticized Democrats for relying so heavily on Laborde’s testimony.

“A thorough investigation would have sought further evidence to complete the record before drawing conclusions based on the uncorroborated statements of one individual,” the Republican report said.

Keith Ausbrook, the committee’s Republican general counsel, told ABC News the report from Democrats led to conclusions “they had already decided on.”

Ausbrook said the report ignored the role that policymakers play in drafting policy and communicating it to the public.

“These guys are doing science, and that’s what they do,” Ausbrook said of government scientists. “And political appointees and other senior officials are responsible for developing policy and programs and taking that science and doing things with it.”

White House press secretary Dana Perino dismissed the Democrats’ report as “rehashed rhetoric.”

“I think that it’s inescapable that they issued the report on a day where [the] U.S. would be represented at the Bali conference, where we are currently talking about the next step for our framework after 2012, which is when Kyoto would end,” Perino said.

Perino was asked whether the White House told employees at federal agencies like NOAA to suppress climate science information.

“Not that I’m aware of,” Perino said. “I do not believe that is true.”

Have Your Say: Did White House Censor Science?
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Lies Of The Health And Fitness Industry Exposed

Monday, December 10th, 2007

Craig Pepin-Donat

If history has taught us anything, it is that when a business concept exhibits the potential for growth, companies and industries spread like a virus to expand and exploit the opportunity. From the meager beginnings of muscle-bound bodybuilders, steel barbells, medicine balls and once-a-day vitamins, the health and fitness industry has transformed into a multi-billion dollar juggernaut. Health and fitness professionals have evolved from spandex and headbands to being highly trained sales and marketing snipers. Your cash is their target.

Although the expansions of this industry and advances in modern technology have helped usher in a new era of quality health and fitness products, they have also opened the door for liars and con artists who could care less about your health. The trick is to understand how to maneuver through the marketing madness to find the truth. Sadly, the number of people who fall victim to unrealistic quick-fix solutions is in the tens of millions. All the while, companies that sell ineffective products, cheap services and unrealistic results profit at your expense.

Beyond the scams and rip-offs designed to separate you from your hard-earned cash, there are people, companies, industries and even government agencies with hidden agendas designed to sabotage your attempts to improve your health. It’s not a conspiracy theory; it is simply the undeniable truth that you will see once the facts are known. There is no shortage of people who stand to profit from those who do not know the truth, and they will do everything possible to refute the facts. Just remember that when it comes to big business and their profits, the fix is in: billions are spent to keep consumers in the dark. You will need to rely on the one thing that marketing cannot spin - your common sense.

Let’s start with a simple truth that helps feed the big, fat health and fitness lie. That truth is that the average person would much prefer to go on a diet or take a pill rather than exercise. This is why the fitness industry, at $17.6 billion in annual revenue, pales in comparison with the diet and weight loss industry, which exceeds $40 billion. Even the supplement industry, with more than $20 billion in annual revenue, outperforms the fitness industry. Yet with a success rate of sustained weight loss as low as 5 percent, more than 50 million Americans line up each year to go on a diet. Why? The answer is simple. When people think about exercise, they relate it to work. Even the phrase we use to describe exercise is to “workout.” The truth is that the average American spends the majority of waking life working. Who wants more work? We want to play. We want to relax. We want to escape from the reality of work, Exercise is the last thing we want to do. Instead, we want a shortcut, and the desire for a quick fix is an open invitation for health and fitness parasites.

But this is just the tip of the iceberg. The smoking gun that reveals the real truth about the state of health in the U.S. is the stratospheric revenue within the pharmaceutical industry. Between 1995 and 2005, prescription drug sales increased by 249 percent to a staggering $251 billion on more than 3.6 billion prescriptions written annually. This doesn’t include the $17 billion we spent on more than 100,000 over-the-counter drugs that contained in excess of 1,000 chemical compounds. As you peel back the layers of the lie, you quickly realize that these record-breaking numbers were made possible by drugs that treat conditions and diseases, which are largely self-inflicted or forced upon us by accomplices that stand to profit from our ill health.

Not convinced? Consider that heart disease is the number one killer in the U.S., claiming approximately 700,000 lives each year. According to the Centers for Disease Control, this represents 29 percent of all deaths. Now consider that two of the main risk factors associated with cardiovascular disease are high blood pressure and high cholesterol. Although both conditions can be mitigated largely with improved eating habits, physical activity and other lifestyle changes; millions of people are diagnosed with these two diseases every year. They are given prescription drugs instead of taking preventive measures. The 2007 estimates of direct and indirect costs associated with cardiovascular disease are $431.8 billion and $66.4 billion for high blood pressure. Drugs designed to reduce cholesterol and triglycerides are the top therapeutic class of drugs with $32.3 billion in sales.

The Federal Drug Administration (FDA) has an interesting way of dealing with our modern-day health crisis. It labels as many conditions as possible as a “disease.” This is important to know because according to the FDA, only a drug can “diagnose, mitigate, cure, prevent or treat a disease.” It is interesting that even obesity is now categorized as a disease. The truth is that obesity is not a disease at all. We didn’t catch obesity; we developed it bite by bite, pound by pound. Big Pharma would have you believe the mantra of “Better living through chemistry.” I’m not buying it and neither should you. Yes, there are drugs that are necessary and many that save lives, but the truth is that we have become a nation of prescription drug addicts who look to pills as the first line of defense for whatever ails us. The solution we find is in the cure-all prescription pads that provide us with toxic, synthetic chemicals that only trick the body and treat the symptoms, while the true cause of our failing health is left to fester. When was the last time you walked out of your doctor’s office without that little piece of white paper? How quickly did you drop it off at your local drugstore?

Unfortunately, the problem with our failing health is not one-dimensional. Beyond the obvious lack of preventive measures to fend off deadly, life-threatening diseases, there are many forms of addiction that contribute to unhealthy lifestyles and lead us down the path toward poor health. Many of these addictions go unrecognized or fly under the radar of conventional thinking. Consider that the number one reason people do not exercise regularly is that they can’t find the time. Yet the average American watches more than four hours of television per day. Not many people would consider watching TV as an addiction, but with one click of the remote, we enjoy instant escape from all the work we want so much to put out of our minds.

Then there are those who like to unwind at the end of each day with a few drinks. No one is trying to bring back prohibition, but could you give up your happy hour for a month? Do the math. An average drink has approximately 125 calories. That means just two drinks per day equals more than 7,000 calories per month. It only takes 3,500 excess calories to pack on one pound of fat, not to mention the fact that when consuming a few drinks before a meal, you are eating under the influence. It’s always easier to say yes to seconds or that chocolate mousse with a little help from an increased blood alcohol level. It’s the little addictions like these that sneak up on us.

Okay, so you can’t live without the brew. Instead you decide to at least cut back on those dreaded calories by purchasing low-calorie, sugar-free, fat-free packaged foods to make sure you don’t get fat. But just as these products have increased in mainstream America over the past few decades, so too have our waistlines. We have been duped into believing we can eat more and weigh less. It doesn’t work that way. If you want to weigh less, you have to eat less and move more. Weight gain or loss is a simple formula of calories consumed versus calories burned.

Another critical issue that impacts our health is toxic exposure. There are many forms of toxicity. Most people don’t recognize that they can slowly and quietly destroy our health and make us ill. Consider the synthetic chemical sweeteners designed to keep us thin. They are laced in thousands of packaged foods. How about sodium fluoride, which is a known industrial waste byproduct that is pumped into our water supply and dental hygiene products? Or what about the chemicals that are routinely injected into our food supply to extend shelf life and improve the color, taste and texture? It’s all good, right? Wrong! It’s all bad.

Our bodies operate with 11 complicated systems all designed to work together to create a state of homeostasis in an ever-changing environment. There are trillions of natural chemical reactions that take place in order for the body to operate optimally. When we introduce synthetic chemicals into the mix, they disrupt the body’s natural function on a cellular level. The effects of toxic exposure may not be recognized immediately, but over time they eat away at our health, and there is a price to pay. Symptoms of disease will rear their ugly head, and when they do, we treat them with more chemicals in the form of prescription drugs.

Perhaps the biggest toxic exposure of all is the one that is responsible for as much as 80 percent of all disease - stress. We are forced to work harder than ever before to make ends meet. We strive to live the American dream of financial freedom, but only a small fraction of the population realizes the dream. The rest are left struggling under a mountain of debt. The majority of every waking moment is spent trying to make more money to buy things we have been conditioned to believe are important, when our health and the time we spend with the ones we love are really the most important things in life. Indeed, the big, fat health and fitness lie runs deep, but there is also truth. Where there is truth, there is hope. The answers are there for the taking, if you dare to open your eyes and see them.

Visit www.FitAdvocate.com for more information about how to protect and enhance your health and your life.

About the author

Fit Advocate, international fitness expert and author of The Big Fat Health and Fitness Lie, Craig Pepin-Donat is uniquely qualified to speak about issues related to health and fitness.
Starting as a nationally certified personal trainer and rising to the top of his profession, Craig led several high profile fitness organizations as president and also served as executive vice president of sales and marketing for the world’s largest fitness organization, 24 Hour Fitness.
With over a quarter century of experience, he has operated more than 450 health and fitness clubs in 11 countries and has visited over 30 countries while studying health and fitness trends worldwide. He has researched and purchased millions of dollars worth of fitness equipment, dietary supplements and other health and fitness related products. From this unique experience, he has developed a keen understanding of the physiology that triggers health and fitness buying decisions and the real world issues that prevent people from attaining lasting results.
A dynamic public speaker and educator, Craig Pepin-Donat has trained literally thousands of people within the fitness industry all over the world. Craig has created numerous professional training programs, seminars and workshops, based on his simple formula for success that have helped millions of people get on the path to living a healthier and more active lifestyle. He has dedicated his life to helping people through health and fitness education and now brings that knowledge and expertise to you in his ground breaking book, The Big Fat Health and Fitness Lie. He developed www.FitAdvocate.com as an ongoing platform to “protect and enhance the lives of health and fitness consumers”.

Have Your Say: Lies Of The Health And Fitness Industry Exposed
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

How to Control the AMERICAN Population

Monday, December 10th, 2007

How to Control the AMERICAN Population by Paul Ehrlich

Brent Jessop
Knowledge Driven Revolution.com

In 1968, Dr. Paul R. Ehrlich wrote a well publicized book entitled The Population Bomb*. Ehrlich predicted widespread famine and disaster unless population growth was reduced to zero in America and throughout the world by compulsory methods if necessary.

Ehrlich is a Professor of Biology at Stanford University specializing in population biology. He has written many books and scientific papers related to overpopulation and has been well rewarded for his efforts.

“Professor Ehrlich is a fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and the American Philosophical Society, and a member of the National Academy of Sciences. Professor Ehrlich has received several honorary degrees, the John Muir Award of the Sierra Club, the Gold Medal Award of the World Wildlife Fund International, a MacArthur Prize Fellowship, the Crafoord Prize of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences (given in lieu of a Nobel Prize in areas where the Nobel is not given), in 1993 the Volvo Environmental Prize, in 1994 the United Nations’ Sasakawa Environment Prize, in 1995 the Heinz Award for the Environment, in 1998 the Tyler Prize for Environmental Achievement and the Dr. A. H. Heineken Prize for Environmental Sciences, in 1999 the Blue Planet Prize, in 2001 the Eminent Ecologist Award of the Ecological Society of America and the Distinguished Scientist Award of the American Institute of Biological Sciences.” - Stanford University Bio

What is Population Control?

Ehrlich’s definition of population control is very telling toward the broader belief system that he holds. As will become clear throughout this article, he believes that the dictates of an all powerful government, supposedly for the benefit of the whole society should trump any and all rights of the individual or family.

From The Population Bomb:

“Population control is the conscious regulation of the number of human beings to meet the needs not just of individual families, but of society as a whole.” [emphasis mine] - XI

“…family planning…By stressing the right of parents to have a number of children they want, it evades the basic question of population policy, which is how to give societies the number of children they need… people would still be multiplying like rabbits.” [emphasis mine] - 79

How to Fix the Population Explosion?

“We must have population control at home, hopefully through changes in our value system, but by compulsion if voluntary methods fail.” - XI

According to Ehrlich the first step to worldwide population control is the control of the American population because:

“We want our propaganda based on “do as we do” - not “do as we say.” ” - 130

A truly commendable ethical stand indeed.

“So the first task is population control at home. How do we go about it? Many of my colleagues feel that some sort of compulsory birth regulation would be necessary to achieve such control. One plan often mentioned involved the addition of temporary sterilants to water supplies or staple food. Doses of the antidote would be carefully rationed by the government to produce the desired population size.” 130

For completeness I will include, below, Ehrlich’s description as to why such a population control method would not work. Please note that his reasoning is purely technical, with no ethical or moral objection to this method. Continuing:

“Those of you appalled at such a suggestion can rest easy. The option isn’t even open to us, since no such substance exists. If the choice now is either such additive or catastrophe, we shall have catastrophe. It might be possible to develop such population control tools, although the task would not be simple. Either the additive would have to operate equally well and with minimum side effects against both sexes, or some way would have to be found to direct it only to one sex and shield the other. Feeding potent male hormones to the whole population might sterilize and defeminize the women, while the upset in the male population and society as a whole can be well imagined. In addition, care would have to be taken to see to it that the sterilizing substance did not reach livestock, either through water or garbage.

Technical problems aside, I suspect you’ll agree with me that society would probably dissolve before sterilants were added to the water supply by the government. Just consider the fluoridation controversy! Some other way will have to be found.” - 130

Some More Subtle Methods

Financial coercion is also an effective method to reduce the population. Ehrlich recommends changes to the income tax laws to encourage small families. But his creativity goes beyond just simple income tax.

“On top of the income tax change, luxury taxes could be placed on layettes, cribs, diapers, diaper services, expensive toys, always with the proviso that the essentials be available without penalty to the poor. There would, of course, have to be considerable experimenting on the level of financial pressure necessary to achieve the population goals. To the penalties could be added some incentives. A governmental “first marriage grant” could be awarded each couple in which the age of both partners was 25 or more. “Responsibility prizes” could be given to each couple for each five years of childless marriage, or to each man who accepted irreversible sterilization (vasectomy) before having more than two children. Or special lotteries might be held - tickets going only to the childless. Adoption could be subsidized and made a simple procedure. Considering the savings in school buildings, pollution control, unemployment compensation, and the like, these grants would be a money-making proposition. But even if they weren’t, the price would be a small one to pay for saving our nation.” - 132

“In short, the plush life would be difficult to attain for those with large families - which is as it should be, since they are getting their pleasure from their children, who are being supported in part by more responsible members of society.” - 131

Abortion

Ehrlich makes his views on the use of abortion to help control the population crystal clear.

“[Japan's] dramatic halving of the birth rate was achieved originally through the sanctioning of abortion. Abortion is highly effective weapon in the armory of population control. It is condemned by many family planning groups, which are notorious for pussyfooting about methodology, despite beginning 60 years ago as revolutionary social pioneers.” - 84

“One of the more encouraging signs of progress has been the change in abortion laws [in the US].” - 89

“Biologists must promote understanding of the facts of reproductive biology which relate to matters of abortion and contraception. They must do more than simply reiterate the facts of population dynamics. They must point out the biological absurdity of equating a zygote (the cell created by joining of sperm and egg) or fetus (unborn child) with a human being. As Professor Garrett Hardin of the University of California pointed out, that is like confusing a set of blueprints with a building. People are people because of the interaction of genetic information (stored in a chemical language) with an environment. Clearly, the most “humanizing” element of that environment is the cultural element to which the child is not exposed until after birth. When conception is prevented or a fetus destroyed, the potential for another human being is lost, but that is all. That potential is lost regardless of the reason that conception does not occur - there is no biological difference if the egg is not fertilized because of timing or because of mechanical or other interference.

Biologists must point out that contraception is for many reasons more desirable than abortion. But they must also point out that in many cases abortion is more desirable than childbirth. Above all, biologists must take the side of the hungry billions of living human beings today and tomorrow, not the side of potential human beings. Remember, unless, their numbers are limited, if those potential human beings are born, they will at best lead miserable lives and die young. We can not permit the destruction of humanity to be abetted by a doctrine conceived in total ignorance of the biological facts of life. [emphasis in original] - 138

Conclusion

The next article in this series will examine Ehrlich’s desires for the rest of the planet, especially the third world. It will also look at the issue of “optimum” world population size and who should get to decide what that optimum level will be. The third part in this series will discuss the need for altering religion, sex education and the role of women in society. Part four will examine in some detail the different organizations, foundations and individuals involved in population control. Finally, I will compare the arguments for “population explosion” with that of “global warming” by directly comparing The Population Bomb (1968) to Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth (2006).

*Quotes from: Paul R. Ehrlich. The Population Bomb: Revised & Expanded Edition (1968, 1971). SBN 345-24489-3-150.

Have Your Say: How to Control the AMERICAN Population
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

US, Israel collude against Iran

Monday, December 10th, 2007

The top US army commander holds high-level talks with Israeli military echelons after the Zionists rejected the NIE report on Iran.

Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Michael Mullen met his Israeli counterpart Lieutenant General Gabi Ashkenazi and War Minister Ehud Barak in Tel Aviv on Monday, Israeli sources said.

Zionists military sources added that Admiral Mullen, who has been reportedly opposed to military strikes against Iran’s nuclear sites, was briefed on the argument of Israeli spy agencies that the Islamic Republic ‘could have nuclear bombs by 2010′.

Israel which is widely believed to possess the only nuclear arsenal in the Middle East claims a nuclear Iran would be a threat to the region. However, Tehran has repeatedly attested that its nuclear program is civilian.

The December 3rd National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran’s nuclear activities concluded with ‘high confidence’ that the Tehran is not pursuing nuclear weaponry.

The NIE report has provoked an outcry amongst hawkish US officials and their Zionist allies; however political observers believe the findings make a US military strike against Iran less likely.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=34419&sectionid=351020104

Have Your Say: US, Israel collude against Iran
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

U.S. Government Checking Amazon Customer Records

Monday, December 10th, 2007

Big Brother U.S. Government Subpoenaed Amazon.com to Obtain Book Purchasing Records of Customers

Mike Adams

Newly unsealed court records have revealed that the U.S. government issued a subpoena to Amazon.com seeking to obtain the identities of customers purchasing books through the Amazon marketplace. The snooping attempt was blocked by U.S. Magistrate Judge Stephen Crocker who wrote in a recently-unsealed ruling, “Well-founded or not, rumors of an Orwellian federal criminal investigation into the reading habits of Amazon’s customers could frighten countless potential customers into canceling planned online book purchases.”

Is the U.S. government trying to profile the psychology of its citizens by secretly data mining their book purchasing habits? Since 9/11 and the passage of the ill-designed Patriot Act (which, if anything, is traitorous, not patriotic), it seems that the U.S. government is aggressively expanding its powers to search records, tap phones and surveil electronic messages, all in an effort to conduct Gestapo-like profiling operations on its own citizens. It is now a well-known fact, for example, that domestic phone calls and e-mails are now tracked and recorded by the U.S. government, then mined for “dangerous” words which are linked back to those callers.

“The subpoena is troubling because it permits the government to peek into the reading habits of specific individuals without their knowledge or permission,” Judge Crocker wrote in his ruling. “It is an unsettling and un-American scenario to envision federal agents nosing through the reading lists of law-abiding citizens while hunting for evidence against somebody else.”

Welcome to Police State Amerika

This News.com story by Declan McCullagh documents how AT&T opened up its massive telecommunications network to U.S. government security agents who used it to profile the telecomm behaviors of AT&T customers. Curiously, the Bush Administration jumped in and classified key AT&T documents, preventing them from being presented in federal court (so we’ll never know what they really said).

For years, the FBI has been operating its ultra-secret Carnivore program that surveils emails, capturing keywords in e-mail communications across the internet. You can read about it on this Wikipedia page. There’s also the Total Information Awareness program from DARPA which sought to create a massive domestic surveillance system that would keep tabs on virtually every electronic transaction made by Americans. Congress defunded the project once its existence was made known by a New York Times reporter. In response, the Feds simply renamed it, refunded it from other “shadow” funding sources, and continued to build the project. It is now up and running behind the scenes here in America. (You can keep tabs on this program and other shadow government operations at the ultra-popular www.Rense.com website, which posts daily headlines on this topic.)

Increasingly, the U.S. government is operating in secret, using greatly expanded police state power to spy on its own citizens. This attempt at acquiring Amazon.com book records is just the latest round in an ongoing campaign of secret police tactics being used against the American people by its own government… a government that was once created “Of the People, By the People and For the People” but now seems a lot more interested in terrorizing the people through fear-based politics and war mongering propaganda.

This is no conspiracy theory, it’s present-day Amerika

None of this is “fringe” information or conspiracy theory guesswork. Every statement made in this article is a matter of fact that’s easily verified through publicly-available records and news reports (not to mention common sense observation skills of what’s really happening). It’s not even a secret anymore: The U.S. government openly admits it is spying on U.S. citizens through various programs, but claims it’s all necessary to protect the public from “terrorism.” Remarkably, most U.S. citizens actually agree with the government on these points, and they happily surrender their privacy and freedoms in exchange for the (empty) promise of security.

These people claim, “If you haven’t done anything wrong, there is nothing to be afraid of when it comes to domestic surveillance.” In doing so, they firmly establish themselves as the reincarnated ghosts of Nazi Germany war criminals, who used the same distorted logic to justify police state laws and round-em-up policies that eventually led to the mass murder of millions of innocent civilians.

Why governments are more dangerous than terrorists

Speaking from historical fact, there is no entity more dangerous to the safety of human beings than a government. More people have been murdered, tortured and imprisoned by governments than by any other definable group (including those involved in the religious crusades). This is precisely why the founding fathers of the United States of America were careful to place the People in charge, establishing a system where the government answered to the People, and where power was never centralized in any single government office or department.

Examine this list of the worst genocides in the 20th century, and you’ll notice one fact that stands out: Almost all of them were committed by governments against their own people! Even more importantly, these were all committed by governments where power became too centralized and the People were stripped of their freedoms, rights and privacies.

Do you notice the pattern throughout history, and do you see where the U.S. is logically headed?

The stripping away of the power of the People is, historically, a consistent prelude to mass genocide. That’s why keeping power distributed throughout society was crucial to the engineers of the original United States of America. Shared power is safe power. A government with checks and balances that actually work is a much safer government than one where the President, for example, can bypass the legislative process by issued Executive Orders. (How many executive orders has Bush issued? Click here to see the list yourself.) Concentrated power is almost universally dangerous, and the use of executive orders to bypass Congress and create whatever laws one person wants to create is a dangerous sign of a growing dictatorship. Shared power is essential in any free society.

But today’s U.S. federal government has long since abandoned any ideas of shared power. Today, it steamrolls over the People of this country, tapping their phone lines without warrants, searching them without probable cause, arresting and imprisoning them but not charging them with any crime, arbitrarily adding their names to “no fly” lists used by commercial airlines, and engaging in other serious transgressions. This example of the U.S. government attempting to acquire customer records from Amazon.com is not any real deviation from the consistent behavior of the U.S. government today: It wants to gather information on the People, surveilling everyone and then selectively declaring who is a “criminal” and who isn’t.

Could it really be true?

Many people, when faced with these facts about domestic surveillance and the dangers of a police state society, simply cannot believe any of it is true. They naively think their government would never violate their rights. The U.S. government is here to protect the People, right?

It’s an incredibly naive belief. To get the facts on how the U.S. government really treats its people, step back a few decades and look at the U.S. Civil Rights movement. The Federal Bureau of Investigation, as well as local government police and law enforcement personnel, repeatedly engaged in heinous crimes against the “Black Power” leaders of the day. They planned and carried out literally hundreds of attacks, bombings and executions of black leaders. (This is not conjecture: It’s all on-the-record testimony from former FBI agents.) And when the Freedom Riders boarded buses and drove through the American South to protest the accelerating violence against the black people, law enforcement personnel took part in the beatings, shootings and violence perpetrated against these innocents. And the FBI? It said that it would do nothing to protect the rights of these black civilians against racial violence, but that if black people were actually killed in the attacks, it would “investigate.”

The history of the Civil Rights movement is a damning indictment of the State. It shows, in gruesome detail, the way in which the U.S. government protected itself at the expense of the freedoms of its people. Even U.S. Congresspeople, Senators and Presidents stood by and did nothing while blacks were being shot, stabbed, beaten and bombed all across the nation. For decades, the U.S. government passed empty laws making racism illegal then did absolutely nothing to enforce those laws. (Read more gruesome historical details in the eye-opening book A People’s History of the United States by Howard Zinn.)

Can a government really treat people in this way? The answer is a resounding YES! And it’s not just any government, it’s the American government. Today, the U.S. government stands as the only first world government on the planet that openly condones the kidnapping and torturing of civilians from other nations, neither charging them with crimes nor declaring them war criminals under which they would be protected by the Geneva Convention (which the U.S. openly ignores). Today, Guantanamo Bay holds prisoners who have been held for six years and never charged with a crime! It is a violation of both domestic and international law, and that’s why the Bush Administration chose to kidnap and imprison these people on non-U.S. land — it was a way to attempt to avoid adhering to U.S. laws establishing the basic rights of those charged with criminal acts. (Yes, even criminals have basic rights, like the right to legal representation and the right to know what crime they’re being charged with.) The behavior of the U.S. in these matters is very much like Nazi Germany and is nothing less than a series of war crimes being perpetrated against not just men from Middle Eastern nations, but also U.S. citizens.

The U.S. government is also the only government in the world to have ever dropped nuclear weapons on predominantly civilian populations (Japan, World War II), and today, the U.S. government is openly engaged in the widespread use of weapons of mass destruction against civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan through the use of depleted uranium shells. They will irradiate the Iraqi soils for generations to come, destroying the genetic code of an entire race. This is a case of mass genocide against civilians being carried out right now by the U.S. government, with the full awareness of the President, the Congress and the mainstream media. The long sought-after Weapons of Mass Destruction have finally been found: They’re being used by the U.S. military!

Heard enough? We’ve barely scratched the surface. As far as the crimes of the U.S. federal government go, tapping into Amazon.com’s records is little more than a drop in the bucket. It’s just a tiny glimpse of the outright betrayal of the U.S. Constitution and the American People that’s going on every day in our nation’s capitol.

So what can we do about it?

As citizens we have both the right and the responsibility to take our power and freedoms back from the hands of the corrupt, pro-war, fear-mongering tyrants who now operate it. I have consistently advocated non-violent protests and grassroots action campaigns that can work towards a better future for all Americans.

I believe that we must do everything in our power — in a non-violent way — to take back our freedoms, our privacy and our power. And we must do it NOW, before the United States of America collapses into a bankrupt police state, drowning in a worthless U.S. dollar, with rampant hyperinflation and a massive expansion of police powers.

There is only one Presidential candidate who even has a shot at delivering this, and his name is Ron Paul. It doesn’t matter if you’re a Republican, a Democrat, a Green Party member, a Libertarian or Independent: If you believe that power should be returned to the People, and that America should cease to be an imperialist, police state nation, then there is only one candidate in the running right now that can even come close to delivering the kind of changes that matter to you. That’s Ron Paul.

In fact, I will offer a prediction right here: If Ron Paul is not elected President in 2008, the United States of America will self destruct by 2025, having suffocated under terminal debt, its currency worthless, its international reputation in shambles, its people impoverished and starving, and its leaders fleeing indictment for their crimes against their own people. It may self-destruct anyway, even if Paul is elected, because much of what has been set in motion is not easily reversible. Read articles by Paul Craig Roberts to learn more…

We have one last desperate effort to turn this around, and that’s the ballot box. It is our last hope to save this nation from near-certain collapse. It is also the last way to avoid the inevitable violence and crimes against humanity that will sadly emerge from the economic and political turmoil that’s almost certainly in our future if something doesn’t radically change for the better. We CAN create a better future for ourselves and our children, but not if we keep electing tyrants and ignoring the increasingly thunderous march of government-sponsored tyranny that seems to set the tone in Washington today.

The signs of economic collapse can no longer be ignored

Skeptical of all this? Look around you. The U.S. dollar is collapsing faster than a skyscraper packed with demolition charges. China is threatening to dump the U.S. currency and start selling all the debt it has purchased from the wild-party-spending United States government — a move that would send the dollar into a tailspin. A secret meeting among OPEC members revealed that they, too, are fleeing the dollar and looking to trade oil in Euros.

The collapse of the U.S. dollar means there will be no more buyers in the world for U.S. debt, and that means immediate hyperinflation of the currency as the government tries to bail itself out of endless debt. Hyperinflation will wipe out the savings of every person in the country with money held in banks. Retirement accounts? Gone. Savings? Wiped out. FDIC insurance? Worthless. Real estate? Collapsed into a decades-long depression. (Think the FDIC will save you? Don’t be so gullible: The FDIC can only bail out a tiny percentage of failed banks in a massive, national bank run, perhaps 2 to 3 percent.)

Just last week, Citibank itself reached out to the Abu Dhabi government, desperately seeking a loan of cash to bail it out of a house-of-cards debt collapse scenario. It agreed to pay a whopping 11 percent interest on a loan to save it from collapse. That technically makes Citibank a sub-prime borrower itself! (When the largest banks desperately need high interest rate loans to bail themselves out of bankruptcy, you know something is seriously wrong with the debt bubble…)

Oil is now flirting with $100 a barrel, a price level that virtually all economists and politicians thought was laughable just two years ago. But smart-minded economics like Stephen Leeb saw this coming well ahead of the masses. If you want to know what’s in the picture for the near future, I recommend Leeb’s newest book: The Coming Economic Collapse: How You Can Thrive When Oil Costs $200 a Barrel. You can get it, ironically, at Amazon.com, the very online retailer where the feds were trying to snoop into customer records:

Meanwhile, the Fed is pumping money into the economy in a desperate move to delay the inevitable popping of the massive U.S. debt bubble. It’s buying up bad bank debt as fast as it can, much like a group of frantic sailors trying to bail water out of a rapidly sinking ship. Only a financial fool could look at the current situation and have any degree of confidence in the future of the U.S. economy, and much of this has been caused by outrageous national debt spending by our current pro-war president.

Ron Paul cannot reverse all this overnight, but if the People use their voting power to eject all the criminals, hucksters, war mongers and corrupt fat cats that currently run this country, we could begin the economic and political healing processes that, in fifty years or so, might return this country to something resembling an honest society. It will take at least two generations to pay off the national debt, and that’s if we radically slash government spending on war and health care right now.

Of course, there is no candidate other than Ron Paul who has any intention of even thinking about paying off the national debt. The issue is simply ignored from one presidency to the next in a great pass-the-buck game that can only end in a sudden a total collapse of the U.S. economy (and its currency). Recent news reports reveal the U.S. debt is now increasing at the rate of $1 million a minute!.

Ron Paul believes in honest currency (having the currency backed by gold, so that savings cannot be stolen from the People through the Fed’s planned hyperinflation). He believes in health freedom and in getting the U.S. out of wars in the Middle East. He believes in returning America to its Constitutional roots, where the People don’t have to live in fear of the U.S. Gestapo police who wiretap their phones, surveil their e-mails and steal their Amazon.com book purchasing records.

If you believe in freedom at all, there’s only one candidate to vote for: Ron Paul.

Sure, Paul has some downsides. He’s not up to speed on global warming and the role of governments in aggressively regulating corporations. I don’t agree with Paul on everything. But for the core issues — war, the money supply, taxation, health freedom — he’s so right on that there’s simply no other candidate that even comes close.

If you believe in corruption, endless debt, secret police, a collapsing economy and an endless stream of government lies, vote for the popular, mainstream, corporate-backed candidates. But if you believe in returning honesty to government, there is only one sensible choice, and his name is Ron Paul.

The People’s Surveillance

There’s also something else happening in society today that might have a chance of helping us all win back our freedoms: People-powered surveillance and the YouTube phenomenon!

YouTube is amazing. That’s where regular people can post videos of things they’ve video recorded in society. The police hate YouTube because it puts them on the record beating innocents, tasering students, and violating people’s civil rights.

Watch how the police assault this woman with a taser:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWaCD6jIH5Q

Don’t forget the “Don’t Tase Me Bro” incident at the University of Florida:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaiWCS10C5s

In this next video, Canadian police EXECUTE a Polish man with a taser:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6nx0Cx3uMk

Here’s a video about a 78-year-old man being tasered by L.A. cops:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIrxrOT4nzk

Here’s a frightening compilation of numerous police brutality videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jIy4FUloxU
(Warning: GRAPHIC, contains profanity)
Most of this video was taken by amateurs.

And don’t forget these amateur photos taken by idiot U.S. soldiers at Abu Ghraib:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_prisoner_abuse

Video is our secret weapon against the tyrants. That’s why authorities hate YouTube so much. Just this week, a group of Canadian health researchers slammed YouTube, claiming it had too many videos from people giving out “false” information about vaccines. (That “false” information, it turned out, was urging parents to avoid vaccinating their children due to the link between mercury in vaccines and autism.)

Keep those videos rolling

There are a lot of good cops out there, and local law enforcement is, of course, a necessary thing. But there are bad cops, bad soldiers and bad tyrants out there, too, and it’s the job of reasonable people everywhere to catch these perpetrators on video, post it on YouTube, and share it with the world.

A surveillance society can work both ways, you see. While the tyrants are surveilling the People, the People can also surveil the tyrants. Plus, we’ve got the internet on our side (because information WANTS to be free!), which gives us the ability to bypass the mainstream media and share information directly with the people.

The internet could be the single most important tool in the regaining of freedom and civil liberties in America and other countries.

So keep those cell phone videos rolling. Keep a compact video camera handy for all occasions. When the authorities step out of line, press the record button and try not to get your ass arrested. Book it back home, upload it to YouTube, and send me the link. We’ll spread the word. (You can reach me through our feedback form, see the Contact Us link on our home page.)

Have Your Say: U.S. Government Checking Amazon Customer Records
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

FDA Caving to Corps

Monday, December 10th, 2007

The Food and Drug Administration is developing a proposal for how drug companies can inform doctors about drug uses that aren’t FDA approved, a contentious but important area of promotion for the industry.

While it is legal for physicians to prescribe drugs or use medical devices in ways not specifically approved by the FDA, companies that make the products aren’t allowed to market such practices. A number of drug makers have been prosecuted for allegedly pushing to increase “off-label” use.

According to a draft of the proposal, the FDA is considering guidelines that would say manufacturers may give doctors articles from medical journals and materials drawn from scientific reference texts that discuss off-label uses of drugs and medical devices. The draft was released Friday by Rep. Henry Waxman (D., Calif.), who criticized it, saying it “would carve a large loophole in the law.” Supporters of allowing distribution of such materials say companies should be allowed to provide doctors with accurate and unbiased information.

Separately, the FDA Friday released a harsh report from a group of its own advisers that warned the agency isn’t equipped to deal with emerging scientific developments. The report said that “science at the FDA is in a precarious position: the agency suffers from serious scientific deficiencies and is not positioned to meet current or emerging regulatory responsibilities.”

The report, from a subcommittee of the FDA’s outside Science Board that included members and advisers from industry as well as academe, echoed past critiques that have said the agency needs substantial new resources. But it was unusually blunt in pointing to specific areas of science where the agency was falling behind, including its information-technology resources, which the report termed “obsolete.” Today, “not only can the agency not lead, it cannot even keep up with the advances in science,” the report said.

An FDA spokeswoman declined to comment on the contents of the report, which will be discussed in a public meeting on Monday. The agency is expected to get some additional funding from increased industry user fees under a bill that recently passed Congress.

On the matter of so-called off-label promotion of drugs and medical devices, there has long been debate, including court battles, about what falls over the legal line. The current legal situation is muddy. A 1997 law that laid out conditions under which companies could distribute certain information about off-label uses expired at the end of September.

According to the draft, the agency would lay out details on what types of publications are appropriate, as well as certain other requirements, such as that the materials come with a copy of the drug or device’s FDA-approved label.

Mr. Waxman said the proposal would allow companies to promote off-label uses. In a letter to the company, he wrote that articles in medical journals may provide “a distorted picture of a drug’s safety or effectiveness,” because journal editors may not know the full story behind a study — such as whether its design was changed, or if negative results were left out of an article.

On the other side, courts have pressured the FDA to avoid restricting companies’ free-speech rights. “Off-label prescribing is very often the standard of care,” and companies should be able to give doctors “truthful, non-misleading information” about such uses, said Daniel Troy, a former FDA chief counsel who previously helped argue against the agency in a major suit over restrictions on off-label promotion. Mr. Troy now represents drug companies and others in private practice.

An FDA spokeswoman declined to comment on the proposal and said the agency would respond directly to Mr. Waxman.

The FDA’s draft proposal seems to try to strike a middle ground, allowing companies to distribute information about off-label uses but setting limits on the practice. Among other restrictions, the draft suggests that letters to the editor of a medical journal wouldn’t quality and that the scientific articles would have to be peer-reviewed. In addition, if the conclusions in a particular article have been disputed, it would have to be distributed along with another article showing the opposing view.

Write to Anna Wilde Mathews at anna.mathews@wsj.com

Have Your Say: FDA Caving to Corps
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Is freedom being eroded?

Monday, December 10th, 2007

Gwyn Topham

For those who fear that our civil liberties are under threat, there is plenty of ammunition. Pre-trial detention has been stretched to 28 days. Britain is home to millions of surveillance cameras. Labour is still planning ID cards. Protests are restricted. Government agencies can intercept email without seeking court permission, and have access to all phone records. Centralised databases of personal information such as DNA are growing. Terror laws, control orders, Asbos and the criminal justice act have all run counter to the traditional idea of an open trial by jury.

Are new laws a necessary trade-off for security in an era of terrorism? And should we worry? Is it true that if you’ve nothing to fear, you have nothing to hide?

Throughout this week on Comment is Free we’ll be looking at liberty and the state. Natasha Walter will open the debate, with AC Grayling, Jack Straw, Madeleine Bunting, Philippe Sands, Mark Thomas, Gareth Peirce, Conor Gearty and others to follow.

With a government weighing up the conflicting arguments of liberty and security, considering on one hand a bill of rights, on the other extending detention without charge, it’s a timely and critical debate.

Meanwhile, to whet the appetite, why not revisit these articles: Timothy Garton Ash on liberty and terrorism. A dissection of the “nothing to hide” defence. Or a wealth of work from Henry Porter, who has consistently and vigilantly monitored what he describes as the shaving away of liberty.

Have Your Say: Is freedom being eroded?
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Ending the surveillance invasion

Monday, December 10th, 2007

Gareth Crossman

Liberty and the state: The state can no longer rely on the misplaced belief that privacy must be sacrificed for securityLiberty’s policy department usually writes for audiences in parliament and Whitehall. If there’s a golden rule for effective engagement it’s this: avoid hyperbole. It undermines your message and alienates the audience. So, when writing on privacy issues, all talk of “Big Brother”, “Orwellian”, and “1984″ has definitely been discouraged. Earlier this year it struck me that perhaps I had been erring on the side of caution when I was asked to speak at an event organised by the parliamentary IT forum. The title? “Big Brother Britain.”

Liberty has long battled against the “nothing to hide, nothing to fear” fallacy that presumes only criminals place any premium on their privacy. If any good is to come out of the HMRC lost disc fiasco it is possibly that people will not continue to take such a complacent approach to their private information in future. Opinion polls certainly seem to indicate an increasingly critical public turning against such privacy relevant subjects as the compulsory identity card scheme. The early years of this century were marked by an understandable, if misplaced, belief that privacy was an expendable luxury to be sacrificed in the name of security. It seems the state can no longer rely on this reservoir of goodwill.

Much of the credit for this is due to the information commissioner, Richard Thomas, and his office. Thomas, whose post is filled on government recommendation, has skilfully navigated a tricky path. He has frequently been constructively critical of government policy while staying within the boundaries required of independent public sector officials.

The information commissioner’s conference this week in Manchester will provide an opportunity to assess what can be done about the “surveillance society”. Liberty will be using its platform at the conference and our new report “Overlooked: Privacy and Surveillance in Britain”, to set out our priorities in helping address the privacy imbalance between state and individual. Of course, legitimate surveillance and information sharing is necessary to prevent crime and terrorism and allow public services to operate. However, we also need proper protection and accountability in a world dramatically changed over the last decade. Some moves, like scrapping ID cards, are relatively straightforward. However, much more is needed.

At the top of the list is the need to review the legislative framework of privacy protection. As it approaches its 10th anniversary, the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA) is looking dated. The protection it provides is being outstripped by the ever-increasing capabilities of mass information data processing capabilities. There is also a need for specific statutory regulation of CCTV. A new CCTV act could ensure fewer and better CCTV systems, meaning less privacy intrusion and better crime detection capability.

Better laws are of little use without proper enforcement. This necessitates greater resources and increased powers for the ICO. Following the HMRC debacle the government has promised the ICO new spot-check powers, an important first step towards a far more proactive role. The lost discs episode also provided an accidental snapshot of ever-increasing levels of data matching and data profiling of personal information that take place daily. The ICO needs to be in a position to ensure data profiling is used with proportionality.

The use of intrusive surveillance for crime detection and national security purposes is, by its nature, secretive. There is, however, much that can be done to increase accountability without jeopardising security. The most invasive surveillance, including phone tapping, should be authorised by a court rather than by a government minister, as currently permitted. In addition, sheer volume issues might make judicial authorisation impractical for less intrusive surveillance methods, currently used by public bodies ranging from local authorities to the Food Standards Agency. However, the role of the various commissioners who oversee these types of surveillance could be expanded to allow greater scrutiny and auditing capabilities.

Today, DNA can be permanently retained for everyone arrested for any but the most minor offences, even if they are then released without charge. This needs to be reviewed urgently. Many thousands of innocent people, including children, have had their DNA sample held, as do three-quarters of all black men. With limited scope for rolling back the grounds of allowing DNA to be taken, the duty to remove samples of the innocent and minor offenders must be explored.

Have Your Say: Ending the surveillance invasion
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

CIA photos show UK Gitmo detainee was tortured

Monday, December 10th, 2007

By Robert Verkaik

Lawyers for a British resident who the US government refuses to release from Guantanamo Bay have identified the existence of photographs taken by CIA agents that they say show their client suffered horrific injuries under torture.

The photographic evidence will be vital to clear Binyam Mohammed, 27, who the Americans want to bring before a Military Commission on charges of terrorism, say his lawyers.

Last week it emerged that Britain had negotiated the release of four detainees who have British residence status but Mr Mohammed, who speaks with a London accent, and at least three others are being held back.

In a letter sent to the Foreign Secretary David Miliband, Britain is urged to ask the US to stop the CIA destroying the pictures.

Clive Stafford-Smith, the legal director of Reprieve representing Mr Mohammed, said that he also knows the identity of the agents who were present when his client was allegedly beaten and tortured. Writing to Mr Miliband, he said: “Given the opportunity, we can prove that the evidence was the fruit of torture. Indeed, we can prove that a photographic record was made of this by the CIA. Through diligent investigation we know when the CIA took pictures of Mr Mohammed’s brutalised genitalia, we know the identity of the CIA agents who were present including the person who took the pictures (we know both their false identities and their true names), and we know what those pictures show.”

He added: “I have been privy to materials that allegedly support the finding that Mr Mohammed should be held, and while I cannot discuss some here (due to classification rules), I can state unequivocally that I have seen no evidence of any kind against Mr Mohammed that is not the bitter fruit of torture.”

Reprieve says it will be pressing for criminal prosecutions against the CIA agents alleged to have carried out the torture.

Last week it emerged that the CIA destroyed hundreds of hours of videotapes showing the torture of detainees held by the US.

Binyam Mohammed was born in Ethiopia but was given leave to remain in the UK after seeking asylum in 1994. Seven years later, he travelled to Pakistan and Afghanistan where the Americans allege that he underwent training in firearms and explosives. In 2002, he was arrested by Pakistani immigration officials at Karachi airport on his way back to the UK. He says he was then taken to Morocco and tortured for 18 months, including having his penis slashed, before being sent to Guantanamo, where he still remains.

Mr Stafford-Smith added in his letter: “As you know, the only purported basis for the US holding Mr Mohammed is an allegation that he is an (’illegal’) enemy combatant. Five-and-a-half years after his initial seizure, he is not currently charged in a military commission, and he has never been offered a fair trial. As you are aware, Mr Mohammed was rendered to Morocco by the CIA and tortured for 18 months in a way that was medieval.

“There can be no rational dispute that this is true. We have the CIA flight records which precisely match Mr Mohammed’s version of events. He has nothing to do with Morocco, and he was not taken there by the CIA for a Club Med vacation.”

Have Your Say: CIA photos show UK Gitmo detainee was tortured
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

CIA uses Jordan for torture of detainees

Monday, December 10th, 2007

One of the countries that has been most frequently used by the CIA for torturing detainees is Jordan, a key US ally in the Middle East.

By Joe Kay

The revelation that the CIA organized the destruction of videotapes documenting the interrogation of prisoners at secret CIA detention facilities abroad has focused attention on one aspect of the US torture program. Another important component is the policy of “extraordinary rendition”—the transfer of prisoners to the control of other countries that specialize in torture.

One of the countries that has been most frequently used by the CIA in this way is Jordan, a key US ally in the Middle East. An article in the Washington Post published on Saturday (“Jordan’s Spy Agency: Holding Cell for the CIA” by Craig Whitlock) documents the close relationship that has developed over the past seven years.

According to the Post, “The General Intelligence Department, or GID, is perhaps the CIA’s most trusted partner in the Arab world. The Jordanian agency has received money, training and equipment from the CIA for decades and even has a public English-language web site,” the newspaper reports. “The relationship has deepened in recent years, with US officials praising their Jordanian counterparts for the depth of their knowledge regarding al-Qaeda and other Islamic networks.”

Despite official denials, however, the main benefit of the Jordan state is that it tortures—and with abandon. The Post notes in characteristically understated language that the GID was “attractive for another reason”: “Its interrogators had a reputation for persuading tight-lipped suspects to talk, even if that meant using abusive tactics that could violate US or international law.”

One of the prisoners who has been subject to this fate is Al-Haj Addu Ali Sharqawi, a prisoner originally from Yemen. Sharqawi was captured in Pakistan in February 2002, transferred to Jordan, transferred to an undisclosed CIA-run prison 19 months later, and eventually transferred to Guantánamo in February 2004.

Throughout this period, he has never been charged with a crime, and there is little prospect that he will any time soon. The US Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case earlier this week that will determine whether prisoners at Guantánamo Bay have the right to challenge their detention in US courts.

Sharqawi describes his ordeal in a written document that was obtained by the Post: “I was kidnapped, not knowing anything of my fate, with continuous torture and interrogation for the whole of two years. When I told them the truth, I was tortured and beaten.”

The Post does not indicate why Sharqawi was originally arrested. The newspaper writes, however, “He was threatened with sexual abuse and electrocution while in Jordan. He also said he was hidden from officials of the International Committee of the Red Cross during their visits to inspect Jordanian prisons.”

Jordan has become notorious for torturing prisoners captured by the government that represent a threat to its interests. “Former prisoners have reported that their captors were expert in two practices in particular: falaqa, or beating suspects on the soles of their feet with a truncheon and then, often forcing them to walk barefoot and bloodied across a salt-covered floor; and farruj, or the ‘grilled chicken,’ in which prisoners are handcuffed behind their legs, hung upside down by a rod placed between their knees, and beaten.”

In July 2006, Amnesty International issued a report noting the “systematic torture of political suspects” in Jordan. The report documented the cases of dozens of individuals tortured in Jordan, among whom were 10 believed to have been sent to Jordan by the United States.

Malcolm Smart, director of Amnesty International’s Middle East and North Africa Programme, described the cooperation of the US and Jordan as follows: “Jordan appears to be a central hub in a global complex of secret detention centers operated by the US in coordination with foreign intelligence agencies. It is into this complex that suspects ‘disappear’—and are held for interrogation indefinitely, outside any legal or administrative process.”

The tapes destroyed by the CIA documented only a small component of a network of prisons and interrogations facilities set up by the US government and its allies. Most of the abuse is never recorded in the first place.

The full Washington Post article can be found here

The Amnesty International report can be found here

Have Your Say: CIA uses Jordan for torture of detainees
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Minister twists truth on ID cards

Monday, December 10th, 2007

Home Office Minister Meg Hillier is twisting the truth in a way only a politician can.

She says “enrolment on the National Identity Scheme cannot become universally compulsory until a further Act of Parliament has been passed”. Does this mean the new ID card won’t be compulsory? Of course not, because, at some point in the future, the Government can just go ahead and pass this “further Act of Parliament”.

She suggests other countries around the world are moving to add fingerprints to passports and that all other (democratic) countries are building databases as powerful as the NIR (national identity register), which simply isn’t true. And if they are, why do we have to follow them?

“The scheme will directly combat the use of multiple identities by criminals, which facilitates illegal activity such as fraud, terrorism, and illegal immigration,” she says, but in no instance have ID cards been shown to be a significant deterrent to terrorist activity.

How will ID cards deter illegal immigrants if they’re willing to repeatedly enter the country? How will ID cards stop benefit fraud when most benefit fraud relates not to ID but to over-claiming?

She says: “The NIR will, just as with the current passport database, hold core identity information. It will not be an amalgam of all existing Government data. It will not hold tax, benefit or other financial records.” But what’s to stop them adding these later?

“The scheme will be fully security accredited and an independent commissioner will oversee it,” she says. Is this the same commissioner who ordered the government to publish Gateway reviews on ID cards in July 2006 and was taken to the High Court by the Government? By the time the case has gone through the courts it won’t matter what Gateway reviews said.

She says: “I have yet to hear realistic alternatives … Doing nothing is not an option.” Again and again we hear of new laws to help us catch criminals and terrorists.

This may come as something of a surprise to Ms Hillier but catching criminals has never been the problem; the problem is that the Government keeps letting them go!

How often in the Mercury have there been reports of criminals convicted of 20, 30 or 40 crimes?

The Government does not need to make us all carry ID cards and watch us 24/7, just stop releasing persistent offenders and leave the rest of us to live our own lives without being told what to do.

Avtar Singh, Leicester No2id

Have Your Say: Minister twists truth on ID cards
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

In Lies We Trust: The CIA, Hollywood and Bioterrorism

Monday, December 10th, 2007

Dr. Horowitz generously donated this life-saving DVD for widespread free public distribution without copyright restrictions. Every American should watch this film to prepare for forced injections, mass quarantines, and official predictions of disasters.

This full version was built by The Kick Them All Out Project: http://www.KickThemAllOut.com from the 16 pieces posted on YouTube so you can watch the entire film in one piece. After watching this film, please join the revolution at the Kick Them All Out Project and help put an end to this insanity once and for all by taking control of our government away from these megalomaniacs!

In Lies We Trust: The CIA, Hollywood & Bioterrorism to learn why your life is entrusted to Manchurian candidates who don’t even know how and why they aim to kill you.

Horowitz brilliantly critiques the government’s new 24-hour television network and feature documentary, History of Bioterrorism, which is now broadcasting daily over the Dish Network.

September is “National Preparedness Month.” Officials say you must prepare for the worst bioterrorist attacks, yet they use fear and gross inaccuracies (propaganda) examined by Horowitz for your edutainment and informed choice.

Have Your Say: In Lies We Trust: The CIA, Hollywood and Bioterrorism
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Related News

This entry was posted on Monday, December 10th, 2007 at 11:23 pm and is filed under War & Terrorism News . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Translate: