Monday, July 18, 2005

7/18/05 - 7/24/05

Ah ha! So this is a part of what they wanted to accomplish with the London train bombings. It would never have been possible without it. Now, the people of NY will tolerate this inconvenience and breach of privacy. The noose upon the public has been tightened another notch.

NY Police Begin Random
Bag Search In Subways

BEIJING -- Security checks on New York's bustling subway - one of the largest and busiest systems in the world - are being ramped in the wake of the second London bombings on Thursday.

Police have begun random searches of bags and packages carried by commuters entering subway stations.

Initially, inspections appeared to be small in scale, with officers attending at least one Manhattan location stopping five men over a 15-minute period as they entered a subway in the evening rush hour.

In each instance, the officers peered briefly into the mens' bags, and then waved them through.

Full-scale inspections are scheduled to be up and running for the peak period Friday.

NYC Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly says the searches are mandatory.

"Essentially it will be before you enter the system. Ideally it will be before you go through the turnstile. You have the right to turn around and leave, but we also reserve the right to do those types of searches if in fact someone is already inside the system", Kelly said.

The city's estimated 4.5 million daily commuters, however, have mixed feelings.

The New York subway system has more than 468 subway stations, most with multiple entrances, and the flood of commuters hurrying in and out of stations during rush hour can be overwhelming for travellers, let alone New York City authorities.

Here is another thing that was accomplished with the London terror event. The Patriot Act was set to expire very soon. What better way to extend it than with an event like this? We can clearly see what their motives were in orchestrating this.

House Votes to Extend Patriot Act

Jul 21, 11:04 PM (ET)

WASHINGTON (AP) - The House voted Thursday to extend the USA Patriot Act, the nation's main anti-terrorism tool, just hours after televisions in the Capitol beamed images of a new attack in London.
As similar legislation worked its way through the Senate, House Republicans generally cast the law as a valuable asset in the war on terror. Most Democrats echoed that support but said they were concerned the law could allow citizens' civil liberties to be infringed.
After more than nine hours of debate, the House approved the measure 257-171. Forty-three Democrats joined 214 Republicans in voting to renew key provisions of the Patriot Act that were set to expire at the end of the year.
The bulk of the back-and-forth centered on language making permanent 14 of 16 provisions that had four-year sunset provisions under the original law, which Congress passed overwhelmingly after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
The bill also includes 10-year extensions to the two other provisions set to expire on Dec. 31, one allowing roving wiretaps and another allowing searches of library and medical records.
"While the Patriot Act and other anti-terrorism initiatives have helped avert additional attacks on our soil, the threat has not receded," said Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.
Rep. John Conyers of Michigan, the top Democrat on the committee, said that while "I support the majority of the 166 provisions of the Patriot Act," the extensions could lessen accountability. "Ten years is not a sunset; 10 years is semi-permanent," he said.
President Bush hailed the vote.
"The Patriot Act is a key part of our efforts to combat terrorism and protect the American people, and the Congress needs to send me a bill soon that renews the act without weakening our ability to fight terror," Bush said in a statement released by the White House.
As the House debated the legislation, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved its own extension of the bill, though it included only four-year extensions for the roving wiretap and records search provisions.
A competing bill also has been approved by the Senate Intelligence Committee, which would give the FBI expanded powers to subpoena records without the approval of a judge or grand jury. That ensured further Senate talks on the terrorism-fighting measure. The House legislation will also have to be reconciled with whatever emerges from the Senate.
The House debate included frequent references to the attacks earlier in the day, two weeks after larger London blasts that killed 56, including four suicide bombers.
The roving wiretap provision, Section 206, allows investigators to obtain warrants to intercept a suspect's phone conversations or Internet traffic without limiting it to a specific phone or identifying the suspect. The records provision, Section 215, authorizes federal officials to obtain "tangible items" such as business, library and medical records.
Advocates argued that such powers already exist in criminal investigations so they should be expressly continued for terrorism investigations. They also cited safeguards in the bill, such as a requirement that a judge approve the records search.
One amendment, passed by a 402-26 vote, requires the FBI director to personally approve any request for library or bookstore records. Another successful amendment sets a 20-year jail term for an attack against a rail or mass-transit vehicle; a 30-year sentence if the vehicle carries nuclear material; and life imprisonment - with the possibility of the death penalty - if anyone is killed in such an attack.
Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich., a former FBI agent, recalled using such tools in gang and child molestation investigations.
"All we do in the Patriot Act is say, 'Look, if we can go after child molesters sitting in the library and bombers who we need to sneak-and-peek on a warrant, we ought to be able to go after terrorists,'" he said.
Critics heralded the bulk of the existing law, but said the sunsets were wisely inserted amid the inflamed passions following the Sept. 11 attacks, and should be retained to assess the long-term impact of the law.
"Periodically revisiting the Patriot Act is a good thing," said Rep. Martin Meehan, D-Mass. "The Patriot Act was an effort to answer the most difficult question a democracy faces: How much freedom are we willing to give up to feel safe?"
Democrats were incensed after Republican leaders blocked consideration of an amendment that would have blocked the library searches. The House approved identical language last month in a test vote.
"If you don't like it, come up and speak against it," said Rep. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., who sponsored the amendment. "But it has passed once and it would likely pass again."

The London bombings are definitely not the end of it. It is a prelude to another massive event as much as I hate to say it.

Dead Pool - Pick The
Next City Attacked

By Douglas Herman
Call me morbid or call me fatalistic, but something tells me--and numerous others--that some unfortunate, unsuspecting US city will be struck sometime soon. Then blame may be shifted from terrorists in Iraq to those in Iran and a Middle East war may continue indefinitely with a blank check from Congress. This plausible event may mirror London but I suspect a few blown buses or subway cars might not be sufficient to sway most American. That would require an attack on an emotional and physical target, a symbol of our nation, so to speak, Martial law may then be declared, and while more conspiratorial doubters may arise, as happened post-911, whatever residual "freedoms" that remain in America after the emotional attack may be no more substantial than the choice of which Blockbuster movie to rent that evening.

Maybe Philly this time? Or Boston or Los Angeles?

Like London, Madrid and New York, some US city (or cities) will likely suffer a sensational attack, coupled with highly suspicious events, none of them reported by the mainstream press except perhaps in passing. Events like those dancing Israelis who were stopped in a white van, the inside of the truck smelling of explosives, moments after the NYC attack. Or suspicious stock manipulations. Put options anyone? Remember those? Not surprisingly, the powers-that-be never found out exactly who placed them. Maybe because, if the American people knew, the outrage might even spur the moribund American media to ask some uncomfortable questions. But then again, maybe not.

Houston, Dallas, Lubbock, Miami, Tampa, Tallahassee--those are just a few of the safest cities that won't be hit by any acts of terrorism. The Bushian family imprint lingers on those cities at this moment, and they're safe from any suspicious "attacks."

Also Portland and Seattle. Those two cities contain a majority of open-minded people. The sort of people who would conduct their own investigations if three of the tallest buildings in Portland or Seattle inexplicably collapsed. New Yorkers, however, being complacent little citizens, except at Yankee games, swallowed the fraud that a 47 story steel building could collapse from a few small acts of arson.

However, I'd put Washington DC, Los Angeles, Philidelphia, and Boston at the top of the my list. Maybe some historic site. Hey, nothing angers the knee-jerk American patriot like an attack on something perceived as scared. Maybe Mount Rushmore or Independence Hall. Or the Washington Monument. Or best of all, the Statue of Liberty.

Perhaps we'll witness a well-orchestrated series of attacks. Like London. Like 9-11.
If FEMA visits your area, intent on some "training exercise" against terrorism, watch out. And don't expect any sort of investigation after the destruction. Again, as in London and New York.

The Dead Pool of American cities that I've compiled would include all of the above sites, would it not? And collateral damage might be kept to a minimum. How many people are wandering around the Statue of Liberty at midnight, for example?

Thankfully, a few patriotic Conservatives--unlike the so-called Liberals--are finally questioning the whole fabrication of that scam called 9-11. The Leftists see Counterpunch) appear to be left out, and the Rightests (see WorldNet) never gave the doubts of 9-11 any credence, indifferent to the morass called Iraq, focusing their ire on Iran.

Likewise, no mainstream site even considers the possibility that the London bombs (as those in WTC-7) may have been placed long before the explosions. But a few brave voices-- like Paul Joseph Watson (Wasn't he the sidekick of Shelock Holmes?)--have been raising a one man storm of doubts. Unfortunately these suspicious discrepancies are blithely ignored by everyone from to Zeenews, never mind the mouthpieces of government disinfo, such as Fox, MSNBC or CNN. Indeed, if the 20th century was the Age of Information, the 21st must certainly be called the Age of Disinformation.

I'm convinced, however, that only by shedding light on schemes devised by the Princes of Darkness, that some black ops have been postponed, cancelled or diminished in scope. When Scott Ritter and Joe Vialls predicted a June strike against Iran, the firestorm of controversy may have prevented the planned strike from happening or being postponed.

But let us consider the list of likely "terrorist" targets here at home. I am convinced certain sites have already been scripted from a multitude of angles and success ratios. Perhaps even a series of attacks, as in London and New York.

My list:

1.Washington DC---Washington Monument, with the Lincoln Memorial a distant second but distinctly possible. Congressional buildings? Who would miss them? Destruction of the Senate, however, might allow the suspension of liberties altogether, as the Reichstag Fire in Nazi Germany allowed a premise for suspension of liberties in the Third Reich. I would think a gas attack or bomb blast in the DC subway might not be "terror-ible" enough for the planners, in order to suspend liberties in Washington DC which, to anyone who has visited recently, is already a Fuhrerbunker surrounded by concrete barriers and seige mentality.

2. New York City (again)---Statue of Liberty. Safest place in any New York "terrorist" strike? The inside the New York Stock Exchange during the day, because who would dare destroy this cathedral? (except early Sunday morning when no one is around). The New York subway system might be bombed, or one of the many bridges and tunnels spanning the two rivers surrounding Manhattan might be destroyed, but how would the mayor and police chief explain away the lack of security? Unless, of course, they were part of the plot, as Giuliani and Silverstein appeared to be in New York.

3. Philadelphia-- Independence Hall

4. Boston-- Faneuil Hall. This largely Democratic city might make a fine target for the next terrorist "attack." After all, Enron's phoney energy hikes to largely Democratic California was an economic attack by a loyal Bush ally, and cost that state billions in damages. Therefore, any large, predominately Democratic city should consider themself forewarned, especially if FEMA visits your city for training exercises.

5. Los Angeles--Too many targets to list, but that insures the safety of LA to some degree. Bridges, overpasses, tunnels and subways are easily accessible at night, to plant bombs to explode at rush hour, but how would this contribute to the suspension of liberties? Chaos is a desired effect but also counterproductive to some degree.

There you have it. No need to fear "terrorism" if you live anywhere else in America, because the terrorists operate mostly in DC and New York. Of course, if you live downwind of a nuke plant, you're always going to be in danger but Homeland Security should have all these well-protected. But you never know the power of a box cutter.

Readers may email me with their likely target. Maybe a defunct nuclear power plant in their home state? I doubt practical sites like the Hoover Dam would be blown up. A huge economic target like Hoover Dam presents many problems to the BO boys and certain well-connected elites (economy) would wreck something that useful. Subways and buses, and the people who ride them, are expendible however.

Maybe all of those glossy travel magazine will soon feature stories about
America's Safest Cities From Terrorism, as they once featured stories in the 'Eighties about liveability. Really, If I lived in any of the target zones above, I would keep my eyes wide open to suspicious people wearing official disguises (uniforms), flashing badges, prohibiting entry, working at odd hours performing perplexing tasks. Watch them!

A few weeks ago, Brazil has publicly acknowledged the existence of UFOs. Now Australia is jumping on board. More and more countries will start coming out about the reality of this phenomenon. Eventually, the world as a whole will no longer be shocked at this reality. The elite want to keep the social shock value at a minimum when the actual event is planned to take place.

Australia Releases
Classified UFO Documents

By Eric Tlozek
Northern Territory News
Secret documents released by the Northern Territory Government reveal a mass of UFO sightings across the Top End, many of them unexplained.

The documents - declassified after 30 years under lock and key - detail a history of UFO activity across the Territory by a wide range of 'sighters', including RAAF crews and weather forecasters.

The files were classified and only became available to the public from the National Archives in Darwin, after 30 years.

One sighting, by the crew of a RAAF Hercules in Darwin in 1968, also appeared on radar, although no known aircraft was identified in the area at the time.

The crew described a series of lights which crossed their take-off path from Darwin airport, with no visible fuselage or structure. RAAF command in Sydney said the contact may have been a foreign aircraft.

"The fact the sighting was made by an RAAF aircrew and detected by the aircraft's radar leaves very little doubt ... (that something) was in the area," RAAF command said.

"As the aircraft has not been identified, a violation of our national airspace cannot be discounted."

Another of the secret documents, obtained by the Australian UFO Research Association, describes a sighting by a weather bureau forecaster at Daly Waters in November, 1966.

The forecaster was tracking a weather balloon with a theodolite when he noticed a flying object in the sky.

He reported sighting a metallic-grey, oblong object flying at high altitude.

A check with the aircraft control office in Darwin revealed there were no aircraft in the area at the time.

A third file reports the sighting of a saucer-shaped object by a group of nurses in Alice Springs in 1967.

The nurses spotted the UFO in the middle of the day and said it was a silver colour with a copper band around the centre.

UFO archivist Dominic McNamara said there were many NT sightings but most were unsubstantiated.

"The NT is a hot-spot for sightings particularly because of its remoteness," Mr McNamara said.

"But the cases where people actually see substantial objects and can describe them are the ones that stand out."

He said tracking down the files was an arduous task because a serial number needed to be quoted to retrieve any file.

So he cross-referenced files from related items, eventually narrowing the field to 170 documents.

The war drums keep beating. It no longer seems as if it is mere speculation that the U.S. will attack Iran. It seems like it is just a matter of time now. It will happen eventually.

US Military Ordered
To Prepare Nuke
Attack On Iran?

From "Dirtyharriet"
Off Libertyforum
The American Conservative - transcribed from hard copy
page 27

In Washington it is hardly a secret that the same people in and around the administration who brought you Iraq are preparing to do the same for Iran. The Pentagon, acting under instructions from Vice President Dick Cheney's office, has tasked the United States Strategic Command (STRATCOM) with drawing up a contingency plan to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States. The plan includes a large-scale assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons. Within Iran there are more than 450 major strategic targets, including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-program development sites. Many of the targets are hardened or are deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option. As in the case of Iraq, the response is not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States. Several senior Air Force officers involved in the planning are reportedly appalled at the implications of what they are doing - that Iran is being set up for an unprovoked nuclear attack- but no one is prepared to damage his career by posing any objections.

I don’t know where this guy is getting his premonitions from but why do I get the feeling that he knows what he’s talking about? Honestly though, as horrifying as this sounds, doesn’t it seem like this is where it is all headed?

The Coming Attacks On America
There Will Be A Series Of Attacks

The first group will be a series of conventional attacks on key public installations
The Main Attack Will Be Nuclear

A city like Des Moines, with its geographical location near Chicago, and it's population (200,000), fits the profile.

What's It All About?
This is about a world financial implosion, and the eventual creation of a one-world government along with a universal currency.
The Zionists, who control the Federal Reserve, have used fiat credit to create an enormous inflation for the past 40 years. They used this wealth transfer to buy hard assets, especially monetary metals such as gold, as well as oil, knowing the coming financial crisis will demand a new currency, and that currency will be commodity-based. The only reason we are in Iraq is so Israel can control the world's oil, of which Iraq has massive reserves. Their final targets are Iran, and Venezuela, due to those nations also having massive oil reserves.
The ensuing world depression will collapse prices, enabling those holding certain commodities to be in a position to buy everything for pennies. The best part for the Zionist elite, is that will all be blamed on the Muslims.

What Is The Sequence?
Israel will strike at Iran's nuclear facilities, and this will be followed by a missile strike on a US aircraft carrier. This escalates into a series of attacks on the USA. Americans will be convinced that it was the work of Iran, when the truth is that it was the work of Israeli intelligence, a False Flag similar to the USS Liberty.
The attacks will be against a theme park, a major mall, a sporting event, and finally a nuclear detonation against a city.

Setting The Stage
Israeli agent Abu Nidal hijacked jets for 30 years, and Hollywood flooded our psyches with countless movies about ruthless Arabs and blood-crazed Muslims. After 30 years of Zionist orchestrated 'Muslim hijackings', America readily accepts that Muslims orchestrated 9/11. Years of Hollywood's tripe sets it's seed. Over the last five years, the Mossad blew up seven Israeli buses (full of immigrants), and sent the bus hulks on trailers around the world, so everyone can see what devils the Muslims are. Conveniently, at the height of Israel's suffering, there is a bus attack in London.

A Flood Of Nuke America Movies
Over the last few years, Hollywood has produced a number of movies and mini-series portraying a Muslim nuclear attack on America. Now, they also use internet propaganda.

Why The Different Targets?
There is nothing like attacking an 'All American' sporting event, in order to enrage the public. A mall attack hits home, due to it being seen as a attack against the economy, and a theme park is aimed at children. Targeting children is a time-honored Zionist technique, due to the massive psychological trauma and angering that it inflicts on the victims.

Hollywood Plants The Seeds
A sporting event allows a multitude of professional real -feed cameras to document the event without suspicion.

The Nuclear Attack
It will be a sizeable nuclear bomb detonated in a smaller Midwest city. There will be at least 200,000 dead. It will be at night, and it will be captured live through a TV feed.

We will nuke Tehran. Leaders, like Bush, will assure us that the Mullahs of Iran were behind this.

Financial Consequences
The economy implodes and the world's currencies devalue. Israeli currency speculators will become rich beyond imagination. After the Federal Reserve-engineered 1929 collapse, this will become the world's greatest wealth transfer. Stocks, bonds, and all financial assets will collapse.

The Question Is When?
Your indicators will be gold and the attack on Iran. A breakdown of gold ownership is: ~ 40% by Zionists, 30% by central banks, and 30% by individuals. For the last decade, the central banks have sold or leased their gold, but individuals have held tight with it. In order to pressure individuals to sell, the Zionists will engineer a gold collapse. Before the attack, the Zionists will have closed all their vital operations in the United States, and have them set up in Israel ahead of time, to manage this massive financial scheme
During the collapse panicked investors will dump their remaining gold, just for cash.

Bankers Offer Salvation
There will be a total financial collapse and the good Zionist bankers will come to the rescue. They will propose a commodity based on a new worldwide currency, that will be based off gold.

Why Gold?
Any commodity would work: hogs, lumber, oil, etc. But you need to store, transfer, and grade the commodity.
Think of 50,000,000 chickens in Fort Knox, or shipping 200,000 hogs to China for a currency settlement. Gold has always been the only legitimate money for thousands of years.

Zionists believe that God mandates that they rule the world. They believe they are the Chosen Ones, and that they know what's best for humanity.
In reality, they are a bunch of ruthless thugs, con artists, and greedy psychopaths. They have started practically every major war, but they have dodged military service during their wars. A silly communications invention, called the Internet, is starting a groundswell of movement where the Zionists' frauds are discussed daily.
They pulled off 9/11 with no repercussions, they had America invade Iraq, and fairly soon they will set off World War 3.

What is up with London these days? Fortunately, this one was no where near as destructive as the original attack 2 weeks ago but I would hate to be riding in the subway in London these days.

More blasts hit London transport
Thursday, July 21, 2005; Posted: 11:51 a.m. EDT (15:51 GMT)
LONDON, England (CNN) -- Four "explosions or attempts at explosions" have hit three London Underground stations and a bus two weeks after the July 7 terror attacks, the city's police chief has said.
Thursday's small lunch-hour attacks in the UK capital came two weeks to the day after bombs on three Tube trains and a bus killed 52 people and the four bombers.
Metropolitan Police Commissioner Ian Blair said the situation was "absolutely under control." He told reporters there had been "one confirmed casualty and that is not a fatality."
"We know that we've had four explosions or attempts at explosions. It is still pretty unclear as to what's happened.

Can you imagine a scenario where the U.S. military bombs the Mecca, Medina or the Al Aqsa mosque in retaliation of a Muslim extremist initiated terror attack on American soil? This would literally be hell on earth. You can kiss the world as you know it goodbye. This is definitely a plausible scenario which would plunge the world into world war.

Congressman Says U.S. Could 'Take Out' Islamic Holy Sites

July 18, 2005 1:08 p.m. EST
Christina Ficara - All Headline News Staff Reporter
Orlando, FL (AHN) - Congressman Tom Tancredo (R-CO) told WFLA-AM in Orlando, the U.S. could "take out" Islamic holy sites if Muslim fundamentalist terrorists attacked the country with nuclear weapons.
Rep. Tancredo made his remarks Friday, yet, his spokesman stressed he was only speaking hypothetically.
According to a Yahoo report, talk show host Pat Campbell asked the Littleton Republican how the country should respond if terrorists struck several U.S. cities with nuclear weapons.
Tancredo said, "Well, what if you said something like — if this happens in the United States, and we determine that it is the result of extremist, fundamentalist Muslims, you know, you could take out their holy sites."
Campbell replied, "You're talking about bombing Mecca."
Tancredo responded, "Yeah."
The congressman later said he was "just throwing out some ideas" and that an "ultimate threat" might have to be met with an "ultimate response."

Here is the guy that will somehow bring a pseudo peace to the earth. The scriptures foretold of him and all the major religions are in expectation of their own version of him. The Zionists will reveal him in the very near future. Most of the people in the world will be duped. Don’t be one of them.

The Mashiach Has Been Revealed to Rav Ovadia Yosef

The spiritual leader of the Shas party reported excitedly to his close associates that he saw the Mashiach arrive at the Kotel and announce:"I want all the Yeshiva students to enlist to teach Torah." Harav Ovadia Yosef told that in his dream "in all of Yerushalayim there were only Jews, and the understanding will understand. All the foreigners that are not from the seed of Israel were not there, they were already removed from the Land of Israel."

by Avishai ben Chaim

The spiritual leader of Shas, Harav Ovadia Yosef, told that on the night of Shabbat (June 2001) Mashiach was revealed to him in a dream. He told that he saw in a dream Mashiach arriving at the Kotel and saying "I want every Yeshiva student to enlist" (to teach Torah).

Harav Ovadia spoke with great emotion and said: "Shabbat night I saw in a dream Mashiach arriving at the Kotel, and the plaza there was filled with people. He (Moshiach) says to them: 'Jews, I came now, and there are a million students that do not learn Torah, they are learning in secular schools. I want all Yeshiva students to enlist. Whoever is for Hashem come to me -- in order to be teachers to teach them Torah. There shouldn't remain a single school without Torah, everyone will learn Torah." After her quoted the words of the Mashiach in the dream, Harav Ovadia said: "I am hearing all this in a dream until I awoke."

Rav Ovadia forbid his associates from describing the appearince of the Mashiach, and his collague Rav Motzpi said that Rav Ovadia told them: "they told me this is the King Mashiach, and he looked like the King Mashiach, and the Kotel was full of many thousands of people, and not only the Kotel, but in all of Jerusalem were only Jews, and the understanding will understand. All the foreigners that are not of the seed of Israel were not there, they were already removed from the Land of Israel."

Rav Motzpi contiuned Rav Ovadia's description: "I saw the entire territory from the Kotel to the Jordan river full of Jews that came from the ingathering, and the revival of the dead, and from all the places, millions and millions of Jews. The entire area was full only of Jews, and of the goyim nothing remained...they said to me that from now on there are no wars, there will be peace in the world, the King Mashiach is already ruling."

Harav Ovadia added to Rav Motzpi that "there was a flag of the King Mashiach there, and on it was written: 'the spirit of his mouth will put Evil to death'." He added some details: "I asked him, Mashiach, why he doesn't reveal himself already? We are suffering and everyone is in misery. The King Mashiach answered me in these words: 'Because there are a million Jewish children who don't say Shema Yisrael, because of this I do not come. Tell all the young men and the Yeshiva students that they should go out and bring the people closer to serving G-d'."

Harav Ovadia Yosef is known as one of the most "rationalistic" Rabbis, who is not involved in mysticism, and generally distances himself from mystical things including talk of imminent redemption and Mashiach.

Don’t be surprised if you eventually hear of a terrorist attack in a western country that is blamed on Iran. It will give the Zionists an excuse to do what they have been wanting all along, that is, to turn Iran into Iraq part II. Except, this time it will be far messier and far more destructive. It’s almost like a bully wanting to beat up the little kid across the street and looking for an excuse. Even if he has to make one up. Let’s face it, the Zionists don’t like the Muslims too much.

US Plans Nuclear Attack on Iran

Philip Giraldi, a former intelligence officer in the CIA (and DIA), claims that the United States is developing a plan for the bombing of supposed military targets in Iran, which would include the use of NUCLEAR WEAPONS. The US strike would take place after a 9/11-type terrorist attack on the US. However, the US attack would not depend on Iran actually being involved in the terrorism. In short, the planned attack on Iran would be analogous to the unprovoked attack on Iraq.

Could this criminal insanity be possibly true? Would the United States really launch an unprovoked nuclear attack? Giraldi is a reputable source and has provided information on Iran to Seymour Hersh in the past. Moreover, other articles have come out indicating that the United States has developed contingency plans to use nuclear weapons to attack military installations in Iran and North Korea. (I have included an article by William Arkin from the Washington Post). Giraldi adds that a terrorist attack on the US would serve as the pretext for putting the plan into action.

Now could it be implemented? Certainly, the 9/11 terrorism led to the eventual attack on Iraq (neocons wanted to attack Iraq immediately after September 11), so another terrorist attack could be used as a pretext to attack Iran. I (along with knowledgeable people such as Scott Ritter) expected the United States to either have attacked Iran by now, or at least be far advanced in its propaganda offensive. While the Bush administration has talked about the danger of Iran, the propaganda offensive has not approached the intensity achieved during the 2002-2003 build-up for the attack on Iraq. Undoubtedly the problems in Iraq and war weariness of the American people have made such a propaganda offensive less viable at this moment. Also, many Americans now realize the war lies the Bush administration has relied upon, so any propaganda offensive, by itself, might be counterproductive. However, a new catastrophic terrorist event could so traumatize and anger a large sector of the American public as to provide a window of opportunity to launch an attack on Iran. The terror attack would be immediately followed by a massive propaganda barrage linking Iran to the terrorism. The idea that Iran is behind all terrorism has already appeared in the writing of neocons Michael Ledeen, Kenneth Timmerman and others. I have attached an article on the current effort to demonize Iran.

Perhaps the most extreme propaganda piece is "Atomic Iran: How the Terrorist Regime Bought the Bomb and American Politicians," by Jerome R. Corsi, which appears to be for average and sub-average IQ types and has been made into a video. It involves the nuclear bombing of the US by terrorists who are equipped by Iran. "The scenario described in ‘Atomic Iran’ shows that a 150-kiloton IND exploded in New York would reduce much of the city to rubble. Some 1.5 million people would be killed instantly, with another 1.5 million certain to die over the next few days."

Naturally, Israel and its supporters are spearheading the move to attack on Iran. It should be emphasized that Israel has for some time regarded Iran as a serious threat. It is a threat to Israel's nuclear monopoly in the Middle East and it provides support to Hezbollah in Lebanon and to a number of Palestinian resistance groups. My article "The future of the global War on Terror: Next stop, Iran" provides information on this issue. My article came out in October 2004, but Israel continues to voice its serious concerns. Some recent comments follow. The Jerusalem Post of June 29 reported a presentation by the head of the IDF Intelligence Corps research division that Iran is committed to building a nuclear bomb, which would help it spread the Islamic revolution across the Middle East.

In late June, Israeli ambassador to the US Daniel Ayalon emphasized that Iran must be stopped from developing nuclear weapons. "The clock is ticking, and time is not on our side," Ayalon said.

Sharon has supposedly handed Bush photographs of what are supposed to be Iran's nuclear installations - –which are certainly as accurate as the Israeli intelligence information on Saddam's threatening WMD.

And Richard Perle was the big hit of this May's AIPAC conference in Washington with his call for an attack on Iran. The danger of Iran was featured in an AIPAC multimedia show, "Iran's Path to the Bomb." As the Washington Post's Dana Milbank described the multimedia show: "The exhibit, worthy of a theme park, begins with a narrator condemning the International Atomic Energy Agency for being ‘unwilling to conclude that Iran is developing nuclear weapons’ (it had similar reservations about Iraq) and the Security Council because it ‘has yet to take up the issue.’ In a succession of rooms, visitors see flashing lights and hear rumbling sounds as Dr. Seuss-like contraptions make yellowcake uranium, reprocess plutonium, and pop out nuclear warheads like so many gallons of hummus for an AIPAC conference."

Since a terrorist attack on the United States is, according to experts, almost inevitable, the Bush administration would likely be given the pretext to launch an attack on Iran. Would a propaganda offensive bring about public support for such an attack? With a Republican Congress it seems quite likely that there would be some type of congressional approval for a strike (not a declaration of war, of course). Maybe the Bush administration would not even seek congressional approval and launch the attack on the basis of alleged self-defense.

Iran is not going to stand around and take it. It is considerably stronger than Iraq. An American attack on Iran using conventional weapons would cause chaos in the Middle East. The use of nuclear weapons would have all types of terrible international ramifications—World War IV against Islam, global terrorist strikes, Sino-Russian reaction, etc.

As Giraldi points out, some Air Force officers are appalled by the nuclear strike plan "but no one is prepared to damage his career by posing any objections." Perhaps, no respectable person would want to risk his career to prevent a nuclear war. But this must be done if the United States, and planet Earth, is going to avoid a catastrophe.

Philip Giraldi, Deep Background

The American Conservative August 1, 2005 p. 27

In Washington it is hardly a secret that the same people in and around the administration who brought you Iraq are preparing to do the same for Iran. The Pentagon, acting under instructions from Vice President Dick Cheney's office, has tasked the United States Strategic Command (STRATCOM) with drawing up a contingency plan to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States. The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons. Within Iran there are more than 450 major strategic targets, including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-program development sites. Many of the targets are hardened or are deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option. As in the case of Iraq, the response is not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States. Several senior Air Force officers involved in the planning are reportedly appalled at the implications of what they are doing—that Iran is being set up for an unprovoked nuclear attack—but no one is prepared to damage his career by posing any objections.

Philip Giraldi, a former CIA Officer, is a partner in Cannistraro Associates

Hey boys, why don’t we create a one world government! Let’s start by making big chunks of free economic trade around the world, that way we can consolidate the big pieces later! We can then rule the whole planet!

The US, Mexico & Canada
By Phyllis Schlafly

The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) has just let the cat out of the bag about what's really behind our trade agreements and security partnerships with the other North American countries. A 59-page CFR document spells out a five-year plan for the "establishment by 2010 of a North American economic and security community" with a common "outer security perimeter."

"Community" means integrating the United States with the corruption, socialism, poverty and population of Mexico and Canada. "Common perimeter" means wide-open U.S. borders between the U.S., Mexico and Canada.

"Community" is sometimes called "space" but the CFR goal is clear: "a common economic space ... for all people in the region, a space in which trade, capital, and people flow freely." The CFR's "integrated" strategy calls for "a more open border for the movement of goods and people."

The CFR document lays "the groundwork for the freer flow of people within North America." The "common security perimeter" will require us to "harmonize visa and asylum regulations" with Mexico and Canada, "harmonize entry screening," and "fully share data about the exit and entry of foreign nationals."

This CFR document, called "Building a North American Community," asserts that George W. Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin "committed their governments" to this goal when they met at Bush's ranch and at Waco, Texas on March 23, 2005. The three adopted the "Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America" and assigned "working groups" to fill in the details.

It was at this same meeting, grandly called the North American summit, that President Bush pinned the epithet "vigilantes" on the volunteers guarding our border in Arizona.

A follow-up meeting was held in Ottawa on June 27, where the U.S. representative, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, told a news conference that "we want to facilitate the flow of traffic across our borders." The White House issued a statement that the Ottawa report "represents an important first step in achieving the goals of the Security and Prosperity Partnership."

The CFR document calls for creating a "North American preference" so that employers can recruit low-paid workers from anywhere in North America. No longer will illegal aliens have to be smuggled across the border; employers can openly recruit foreigners willing to work for a fraction of U.S. wages.

Just to make sure that bringing cheap labor from Mexico is an essential part of the plan, the CFR document calls for "a seamless North American market" and for "the extension of full labor mobility to Mexico."

The document's frequent references to "security" are just a cover for the real objectives. The document's "security cooperation" includes the registration of ballistics and explosives, while Canada specifically refused to cooperate with our Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI).

To no one's surprise, the CFR plan calls for massive U.S. foreign aid to the other countries. The burden on the U.S. taxpayers will include so-called "multilateral development" from the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank, "long-term loans in pesos," and a North American Investment Fund to send U.S. private capital to Mexico.

The experience of the European Union and the World Trade Organization makes it clear that a common market requires a court system, so the CFR document calls for "a permanent tribunal for North American dispute resolution." Get ready for decisions from non-American judges who make up their rules ad hoc and probably hate the United States anyway.

The CFR document calls for allowing Mexican trucks "unlimited access" to the United States, including the hauling of local loads between U.S. cities. The CFR document calls for adopting a "tested once" principle for pharmaceuticals, by which a product tested in Mexico will automatically be considered to have met U.S. standards.

The CFR document demands that we implement "the Social Security Totalization Agreement negotiated between the United States and Mexico." That's code language for putting illegal aliens into the U.S. Social Security system, which is bound to bankrupt the system.

Here's another handout included in the plan. U.S. taxpayers are supposed to create a major fund to finance 60,000 Mexican students to study in U.S. colleges.

To ensure that the U.S. government carries out this plan so that it is "achievable" within five years, the CFR calls for supervision by a North American Advisory Council of "eminent persons from outside government . . . along the lines of the Bilderberg" conferences.

The best known Americans who participated in the CFR Task Force that wrote this document are former Massachusetts Governor William Weld and Bill Clinton's immigration chief Doris Meissner. Another participant, American University Professor Robert Pastor, presented the CFR plan at a friendly hearing of Senator Richard Lugar's Foreign Relations Committee on June 9.

Ask your Senators and Representatives which side they are on: the CFR's integrated North American Community or U.S. sovereignty guarded by our own borders.

The next month is going to be a very interesting one in the Gaza strip. The disengagement is scheduled in mid August and there will be a lot of turmoil leading up to it. In the event that the disengagement is successful and the Palestinians have full occupation of the area of Gaza where it is supposed to happen, it may be bad news. Don’t trust the Israeli government on their “gracious plan for peace” in giving this land to the Palestinians. There’s no way they are doing this for peaceful reasons. There is definitely an ulterior motive. I wouldn’t be surprised if the real objective behind this whole disengagement was for the purpose of concentrating the Palestinians to a central geographic location devoid of Jews to do the unthinkable against them. Keep your safety belt fastened. We’ll hear more about these developments in the coming weeks.

July 15, 2005
What May Come After the Evacuation of Jewish Settlers from the Gaza Strip
A Warning from Israel

We feel that it is urgent and necessary to raise the alarm regarding what may come during and after evacuation of Jewish settlers from the Gaza Strip occupied by Israel in 1967, in the event that the evacuation is implemented.
We held back on getting this statement published and circulated, seeking additional feedback from our peers. The publication in Ha'aretz (22 June 2005) quoting statements by General (Reserves) Eival Giladi, the head of the Coordination and Strategy team of the Prime Minister's Office, motivated us not to delay publication and circulation any further. Confirming our worst fears, General (Res.) Eival Giladi went on record in print and on television to the effect that "Israel will act in a very resolute manner in order to prevent terror attacks and [militant] fire while the disengagement is being implemented" and that "If pinpoint response proves insufficient, we may have to use weaponry that causes major collateral damage, including helicopters and planes, with mounting danger to surrounding people."
We believe that one primary, unstated motive for the determination of the government of the State of Israel to get the Jewish settlers of the Qatif (Katif) settlement block out of the Gaza Strip may be to keep them out of harm's way when the Israeli government and military possibly trigger an intensified mass attack on the approximately one and a half million Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, of whom about half are 1948 Palestine refugees.
The scenario could be similar to what has already happened in the past - a tactic that Ariel Sharon has used many times in his military career - i.e., utilizing provocation in order to launch massive attacks.
Following this pattern, we believe that Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Defence Minister Shaul Mofaz are considering to utilize provocation for vicious attacks in the near future on the approximately one and a half million Palestinian inhabitants of the Gaza Strip: a possible combination of intensified state terror and mass killing. The Israeli army is not likely to risk the kind of casualties to its soldiers that would be involved in employing ground troops on a large scale in the Gaza Strip. With General Dan Halutz as Chief of Staff they don't need to. It was General Dan Halutz, in his capacity as Commander of the Israeli Air Force, who authorized the bombing of a civilian Gaza City quarter with a bomb weighing one ton, and then went on record as saying that he sleeps well and that the only thing he feels when dropping a bomb is a slight bump of the aircraft.
The initiators of this alarm have been active for many decades in the defence of human rights inside the State of Israel and beyond. We do not have the academic evidence to support our feeling, but given past behavior, ideological leanings and current media spin initiated by the Israeli government and military, we believe that the designs of the State of Israel are clear, and we submit that our educated intuition with matters pertaining to the defence of human rights has been more often correct than otherwise.
We urge all those who share the concern above to add their names to ours and urgently give this alarm as wide a circulation as possible.
Circulating and publishing this text may constitute a significant factor in deterring the Israeli government, thus protecting the Palestinian population in the Gaza Strip from this very possible catastrophe and contributing to prevent yet more war crimes from occurring.

While the public media is focused on Iran, North Korea and Al Qaeda…very quietly in the background, another massive enemy against the U.S. is evolving into existence. Will the U.S. have any friends left, other than Israel and Great Britain? The U.S. is slowly being weakened in every way by the puppet masters of the world. It has clearly served it’s purpose since 1776 and it is being treated like an old disposable razor. Who knows where this will lead on the road to the new world order?

China tilts to Russia to counter Uncle Sam
By Wang Kun-yi 王崑義

Thursday, Jul 14, 2005,Page 8
Last week, Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) and Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a "China-Russia Joint Statement on the 21st Century World Order." With this, China is returning to a strategy of depending on a single ally. But the deeper significance of this statement is that it contributes to China's emerging strategy of unilateral threats, a bilateral defense and multilateral solutions to problems it sees in the international situation.
The single-ally strategy was chosen by Mao Zedong (毛澤東) after the Korean war, when China joined hands with the Soviet Union to counter the US threat by making all of China's defenses and development dependent on the Soviet Union. After the Sino-Soviet split in the 1960s, Mao drew a line between China and the Soviet Union. In the late 1960s and 1970s China turned toward a "one line of defense" and a "one great defense area" strategy.
Mao felt that to stop Soviet hegemony from spreading across the globe, China should help build a global "front line" alliance with Japan, Europe, Australia, New Zealand and the US, and also unite the surrounding countries in one "defense area."
After 1982, China no longer emphasized this anti-Soviet alliance. Instead, it adopted a strategy of keeping the US and the Soviet Union at an equal distance.
In the 1990s, following the end of the Cold War, China adopted another strategic direction in its pursuit of a Great Nation strategy -- the circle, line, area and point approach. The circle meant building friendly relations with the surrounding countries, the line meant taking a friendly approach toward the line of nations willing to assist China's development through financial and technical assistance, the area meant the area that would share in China's prosperity when its economy is fully developed, and the point meant the competitive and cooperative relationship China is forced to maintain with the US following its post-Cold War rise to unipolar hegemony.
Against the backdrop of this Chinese strategy, the US and Japan held a security meeting in February this year during which the two nations identified security in the Taiwan Strait as a joint strategic concern. The reaffirmation by the US and Japan of their military alliance made China feel a new urgency to counter the US threat.
Hu then returned to Mao's strategy of depending on a single ally, as if that is once again the only way to handle US threats. To deal with the unilateral threat posed by the US, Hu chose to embrace Russia and build a closer strategic partnership between the two nations. Last week's statement firmly established an anti-US bilateral defensive relationship.
In addition to repeating the two countries' opposition to the US' invasion of Iraq, China and Russia's joint statement also recognizes that the recent theoretical developments relating to the UN system have introduced concepts such as global governance, global democracy, comprehensive security and world citizenship.
Given the strengthening and reform envisioned for the UN, the organization stands a greater chance of providing multilateral solutions to global conflicts. China's decision to pin its hopes on the UN to help resolve potential conflict between China and the US is therefore dictated by necessity.
History shows that China has never gained any advantage by allying with Russia. This time around, China has already experienced setbacks, by making big concessions on Sino-Russian border issues. It will be interesting to see if Hu will lose even more when China moves closer to Russia to oppose the US.
Wang Kun-yi is an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of International Affairs and Strategic Studies at Tamkang University.