Classified Listings

Find jobs, housing, for sale, personals, services, local community, and events.

USA Online local classifieds

Community - politics classifieds in san francisco

<![CDATA[Palin's clock gets cleaned every time she gets interviewed.]]>

<![CDATA[Ha ha!]]>

<![CDATA[Support AZ. with free faxes to -OUR- lawmakers & get "lots" of good INFO. here ---> <a href="http://phoenix.craigslist.org/cph/pol/1868922434.html" rel="nofollow">http://phoenix.craigslist.org/cph/pol/1868922434.html</a> thanks GOD BLESS THE U.S.!!!]]>

<![CDATA[1. If the media says they told the truth, they lied. I say they lied. 2. When? 3. Really, when did this happen? 4. You must be kidding. The world loves war and will do anything it can to keep wars going on and on and on. 5. Don't give a shit... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- re Does Emma actually have some positive suggestions? (mountain view) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 2010-07-30, 8:06PM PDT Reply to: see below -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Does Emma actually have some positive suggestions? 1. media reports the truth, admits they've been lying.. 2. ruling elite admits to the truth, asks for forgiveness 3. people forgive ruling elite 4. world is governed by people who care about peace and justice 5. giants win world series simple! will you help? it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests PostingID: 1872583714 ]]>

<![CDATA[Does Emma actually have some positive suggestions? 1. media reports the truth, admits they've been lying.. 2. ruling elite admits to the truth, asks for forgiveness 3. people forgive ruling elite 4. world is governed by people who care about peace and justice 5. giants win world series simple! will you help?]]>

<![CDATA[Pete the prick Stark in the east bay is looking for volunteers to satisfy his cravings. He is looking for volunteers that he can perform blow jobs on. ]]>

<![CDATA[<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMM_T_PJ0Rs&feature=player_embedded" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMM_T_PJ0Rs&feature=player_embedded</a>]]>

<![CDATA[Hello- I am Interested in Volunteering for either Republican or Democratic Candidates for the 2010 election Cycle. I have done alot of Political Campaign Volunteering over the past 17 and a half years I have made many get out the vote phone calls and I also have walked many precients and I also have been an Office Manager a total of 5+ times on Campaign Teams and I also have been to campaign management schools and I also have volunteered at the National Conventions and I also help out at the farmers market in Pleasanton registering New Voters and Recruiting New Volunteers. I wanted to see if any of the candidates like Jerry Mcnerney or Jerry Brown or Meg Whitman or Carly For U.S. Senate is looking for any Volunteers or any Interns at this time? Please let me know Thanks. Chris.]]>

<![CDATA[don't care about non-white Americans being illegally profilied based on their race/ethnic heritage in violation of the US Constitution and Federal Law ....Then they can pound sand because Latino/Hispanic American Citizens aren't going anywhere except into a majority Voting Power that will kick your racist cracker ass at the Election! If you don't like living around a bunch of people that look like they're from Mexico and South America then you can move to Canada,Rural United Kingdom or Alaska because your Brown Neighbors aren't moving because you don't like them Too Bad for you tough shit! signed a Fed up caucasian/white (I like my neighbors)]]>

<![CDATA[Along with commenting on it.]]>

<![CDATA[Meetings to organize for third parties and independents. Search meetup.com for Free and Equal Party. Wednesday and Friday nights at 7:30 to 8:30 pm at Caffe Mediterraneum on Telegraph Avenue in Berkeley, CA]]>

<![CDATA[One guy calls the other one "dumbass," the other one retaliates with "Prof. Shitology." This is exactly the kind of thing that ruins this board.]]>

<![CDATA[A court has ruled on it, the United States District Court, Distict of Arizona. Thus the injuction against the enactment of most of the law. That is the ruling unless it is overturned on appeal.]]>

<![CDATA[Fuck the liberal fag. He was a shit governor before. A shit Oakland mayor. A career parasite politician who has always fucked up. Now you want to vote for him again? Wake up assholes.]]>

<![CDATA[Here's Why. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNl_dMVmuZQ" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNl_dMVmuZQ</a>]]>

<![CDATA[the Arizona illegal alien law. The U.S. Supreme Court or SOME court has to hand down a ruling on the constitutionality of the law. Until then, we're all just spinning our wheels. I know it may be hard for some people to control their tempers, but let's try to keep it civil, shall we?]]>

<![CDATA[Uh...no.]]>

<![CDATA[don't want to be racially profiled THEN they should go back to Mexico where they will look and talk like everyone else. Obama IS the Anti-Christ. (From the fictional Left Behind series.) I support Arizona all the way.]]>

<![CDATA[ Nobody cares about your argument, will you ladies take it to private e-mails between yourselves. Can't you 2 geniuses figure it out?]]>

<![CDATA[And that affects the constitutionality of the AZ law how...........dumbass?]]>

<![CDATA[It looks like the same people who are telling us the government is getting too powerful turn right around and insist that this same government hire more ICE agents to crack down on illegal aliens. Shit, if they can crack down on illegals, what's to prevent them from going after ordinary citizens?]]>

<![CDATA[Actually it is a very simple premise.......dumbass......I have tried over an over to get the debate back to the issue of the unconstitutionality of the AZ law......yet dumbasses, like you......try to change the subject. Jesus there are dumbasses here!!!!! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 2010-07-30, 12:59PM PDT Reply to: comm-kpxgk-1872115813@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Interesting premise, anyone who doesn't like the content of your post has to be your famous opponent. I suppose the post from Berkeley was this person as well. ]]>

<![CDATA[Interesting premise, anyone who doesn't like the content of your post has to be your famous opponent. I suppose the post from Berkeley was this person as well. Date: 2010-07-30, 12:43PM PDT Reply to: comm-qtqzb-1872081329@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?] Speaking of emotionally unstable .........posting in the third person now, eh..........dumbass? ]]>

<![CDATA[Jim Garrison says in his book "On the Trail of the Assassins" that all of Oswald's coworkers at a certain company in New Orleans later found employment at NASA. Does this indicate that there are connections between the CIA and NASA? Can a CIA handler call up a NASA exec and tell him, "I've got this guy who needs a job, can you hire him?"? Could it be that some of NASA's execs came from the CIA originally or at least know somebody in the CIA?]]>

<![CDATA[The more you report the more ICE becomes overwhelmed, they call for more employees, eventually the government will take notice and as the election year get closer they will start doing there job if they all think they will be voted out. DEPORT ALL ILLEGALS! TURN IN ALL SUSPECTED ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS! It's apparent that its becoming a matter of National Security. ]]>

<![CDATA[You have been more active chasing after him than he you, furthermore your endless line of insults and attempts to arrange for a fight make you out to be a emotionally unbalanced individual regardless the merits of your argument. Your posts typify a man with anger management issues, you are acting childishly. You must start in U.S. District court on questions of constitutionality, as has been done. This lower court feels that the law is so unconstitutional that it ruled in favor of an emergency injunction because of the potential damage that could be done if the law was allowed to stand during any appeal. AZ is appealing to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Once the Circuit court issues an order or opinion, it can be appealed to the Supreme Court. It doesn’t matter if the Supreme Court hears it or not, a lower federal court can decide whether a statute in violation of the U.S. Constitution. I call them like I see them. The guy who faithfully comes when called "dumbass" is always throwing out red herrings......like a dumbass. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 2010-07-30, 11:41AM PDT Reply to: comm-8barn-1871949250@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- then somebody will have to sue and get the Supreme Court involved, right? That's how we do things in this country, not by calling people "dumbass." ]]>

<![CDATA[9/11 and the American Empire By David Ray Griffin <a href="http://911review.com/articles/griffin/madison.html#foreknowledge" rel="nofollow">http://911review.com/articles/griffin/madison.html#foreknowledge</a> Excerpt: 5. Evidence for Foreknowledge by US Officials A central aspect of the official story about 9/11 is that the attacks were planned entirely by al Qaeda, with no one else knowing the plans. A year after the attacks, FBI Director Robert Mueller said: "To this day we have found no one in the United States except the actual hijackers who knew of the plot."[19] Since that time, federal officials have had to admit that they had received far more warnings prior to 9/11 than they had previously acknowledged. But these admissions, while raising the question of why further safety measures were not put in place, do not necessarily show that federal officials had specific foreknowledge of the attacks. One could still, as did the 9/11 Commission, accept the conclusion published at the end of 2002 by the Congressional Joint Inquiry, according to which “none of [the intelligence gathered by the US intelligence community] identified the time, place, and specific nature of the attacks that were planned for September 11, 2001.”[20] Unfortunately for the official account, however, there are reports indicating that federal officials did have that very specific type of information. I will give two examples. David Schippers and the FBI Agents: The first example involves attorney David Schippers, who had been the chief prosecutor for the impeachment of President Clinton. Two days after 9/11, Schippers declared that he had received warnings from FBI agents about the attacks six weeks earlier--warnings that included both the dates and the targets. These agents had come to him, Schippers said, because FBI headquarters had blocked their investigations and threatened them with prosecution if they went public with their information. They asked Schippers to use his influence to get the government to take action to prevent the attacks. Schippers was highly respected in Republican circles, especially because of his role in the impeachment of Clinton. And yet, he reported, Attorney General Ashcroft repeatedly failed to return his calls.[21] Schippers’ allegations about the FBI agents were corroborated in a story by William Norman Grigg called “Did We Know What Was Coming?”, which was published in The New American, a very conservative magazine. According to Grigg, the three FBI agents he interviewed told him “that the information provided to Schippers was widely known within the Bureau before September 11th.”[22] If Schippers, Grigg, and these agents are telling the truth, it would seem that when FBI Director Mueller claimed that the FBI had found no one in this country with advance knowledge of the plot, he was not telling the truth. The Put Options: The government also would have had foreknowledge of the attacks because of an extraordinarily high volume of “put options” purchased in the three days before 9/11. To buy put options for a particular company is to bet that its stock price will go down. These purchases were for two, and only two, airlines--United and American--the two airlines used in the attacks, and for Morgan Stanley Dean Witter, which occupied 22 stories of the World Trade Center. The price of these shares did, of course, plummet after 9/11. As the San Francisco Chronicle said, these unusual purchases, which resulted in profits of tens of millions of dollars, raise “suspicions that the investors . . . had advance knowledge of the strikes.”[23] For our purposes, the most important implication of this story follows from the fact that US intelligence agencies monitor the market, looking for signs of imminent untoward events.[24] These extraordinary purchases, therefore, would have suggested to intelligence agencies that in the next few days, United and American airliners were going to be used in attacks on the World Trade Center. This is fairly specific information. These two examples imply the falsity of the Joint Inquiry’s statement that “none of [the intelligence gathered by the US intelligence community] identified the time, place, and specific nature of the attacks.” Indeed, one of the FBI agents interviewed by William Grigg reportedly said: “Obviously, people had to know. . . . It’s terrible to think this, but this must have been allowed to happen as part of some other agenda.”[25] He was right. This would be terrible. There is considerable evidence, however, that the full truth is even more terrible---that the reason some US officials had foreknowledge of the attacks is because they had planned them.]]>

<![CDATA[Speaking of emotionally unstable .........posting in the third person now, eh..........dumbass? ]]>

<![CDATA[I'm shocked, shocked I tell you! Oh Prof. have you lost control of your facilities? "You have........ "know"......... idea what I am like in real life and if you would ever like to meet to see if I am a coward, just let me know. " Is English your first language? Date: 2010-07-30, 12:08PM PDT Reply to: comm-afk7n-1872008369@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?] Challenging me to a face to face confrontation LOL boy have you lost your cool........but then when you only have verbal assaults to offer (and they prove ineffective) I suppose physical assault is your next course of action. So where am I to meet you, in California or your crib in Nevada. LOL You're a treasure chest of phony Liberal outrage aren't you Prof.? Being an expert in Shitology sure gets you frazzled! Will your next post inform us how you plan to hunt me down for challenging you? LOL Oh lord, I'm so scared!!! Date: 2010-07-30, 10:51AM PDT Reply to: comm-rs3mt-1871837883@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?] Sorry to hear.....dumbass.....that you have been reduced to one thought. Lets see.....maybe you should read this real slow.......The AZ law is unconstitutional........which has absoultly nothing to do with where I live........who lives next door to me.... how I conduct yourself personally with regards to associating with the illegal’s ...or the fact that you are a dumbass. None of that changes the fact that the law is unconstitutional. Get it? You seem to be saying that it is okay for a state to throw the U.S. Constitution out the window......make up there own laws on issues that are clearly left to the federal government..........dumbass! Now lets look at a bit of hypocrisy. You state: "An armchair self-righteous social commentator more than willing to attack those who won't agree with you but obviously a coward in real life." which describes you to a tee, ie this statement "You are a child, an angry dissatisfied juvenile ....". You have know idea what I am like in real life and if you would ever like to meet to see if I am a coward, just let me know. And a bit more hypocrisy: Insulting is what you're all about, in fact you've made a profession...... and get this "and by calling you Prof. Shitology is only stating a well documented fact. And some final hypocrisy: How you can extract yourself from further exposure of your baseless prattle. Jesus there are dumbasses here!!!!! ]]>

<![CDATA[Typical......of a dumbass.......when confronted by your own hypocrisy.......over and over......you react with a spittle coated post. I must say.......dumbass.......you are a fun distraction. Now let me ask you this............how do know that I am a liberal? Is it because I believe in the constitution??????? And you have yet to try tell me how......in your opinion.......or someone else’s plagiarized opinion.....how the AZ law IS constitutional under the theory of federal preemption. Remember? My initial point? And once again a bit of your own hypocrisy: Challenging me to a face to face confrontation LOL boy have you lost your cool........but then when you only have verbal assaults to offer (and they prove ineffective)...... . Actually I simply offered to meet you. You are the one who brought up any physical confrontation.......you react like a puppy who as been beaten.......poor thing. Waiting eagerly for you most profound response. Jesus there are dumbasses here! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 2010-07-30, 12:08PM PDT Reply to: comm-afk7n-1872008369@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Challenging me to a face to face confrontation LOL boy have you lost your cool........but then when you only have verbal assaults to offer (and they prove ineffective) I suppose physical assault is your next course of action. So where am I to meet you, in California or your crib in Nevada. LOL You're a treasure chest of phony Liberal outrage aren't you Prof.? Being an expert in Shitology sure gets you frazzled! Will your next post inform us how you plan to hunt me down for challenging you? LOL Oh lord, I'm so scared!!! ]]>

<![CDATA[I think it's very clear that the one who calls people "dumbass" hasn't the wherewithal to have a discussion, all his efforts revolve around lashing out condemning others. He's not interested is respectful disagreements. Now he wants to meet somebody face to face to have a fight, reminds me of Joe Six Pack daring people to meet him in Yosemite for a duel. Unfortunately we have another emotionally unstable person in our forum. This type of posting should be flagged and removed, it has no place here and either does anyone who openly promotes violence. Date: 2010-07-30, 11:41AM PDT Reply to: comm-8barn-1871949250@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?] then somebody will have to sue and get the Supreme Court involved, right? That's how we do things in this country, not by calling people "dumbass." ]]>

<![CDATA[Challenging me to a face to face confrontation LOL boy have you lost your cool........but then when you only have verbal assaults to offer (and they prove ineffective) I suppose physical assault is your next course of action. So where am I to meet you, in California or your crib in Nevada. LOL You're a treasure chest of phony Liberal outrage aren't you Prof.? Being an expert in Shitology sure gets you frazzled! Will your next post inform us how you plan to hunt me down for challenging you? LOL Oh lord, I'm so scared!!! Date: 2010-07-30, 10:51AM PDT Reply to: comm-rs3mt-1871837883@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?] Sorry to hear.....dumbass.....that you have been reduced to one thought. Lets see.....maybe you should read this real slow.......The AZ law is unconstitutional........which has absoultly nothing to do with where I live........who lives next door to me.... how I conduct yourself personally with regards to associating with the illegal’s ...or the fact that you are a dumbass. None of that changes the fact that the law is unconstitutional. Get it? You seem to be saying that it is okay for a state to throw the U.S. Constitution out the window......make up there own laws on issues that are clearly left to the federal government..........dumbass! Now lets look at a bit of hypocrisy. You state: "An armchair self-righteous social commentator more than willing to attack those who won't agree with you but obviously a coward in real life." which describes you to a tee, ie this statement "You are a child, an angry dissatisfied juvenile ....". You have know idea what I am like in real life and if you would ever like to meet to see if I am a coward, just let me know. And a bit more hypocrisy: Insulting is what you're all about, in fact you've made a profession...... and get this "and by calling you Prof. Shitology is only stating a well documented fact. And some final hypocrisy: How you can extract yourself from further exposure of your baseless prattle. Jesus there are dumbasses here!!!!! ]]>

<![CDATA[You must start in U.S. District court on questions of constitutionality, as has been done. This lower court feels that the law is so unconstitutional that it ruled in favor of an emergency injunction because of the potential damage that could be done if the law was allowed to stand during any appeal. AZ is appealing to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Once the Circuit court issues an order or opinion, it can be appealed to the Supreme Court. It doesn’t matter if the Supreme Court hears it or not, a lower federal court can decide whether a statute in violation of the U.S. Constitution. I call them like I see them. The guy who faithfully comes when called "dumbass" is always throwing out red herrings......like a dumbass. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 2010-07-30, 11:41AM PDT Reply to: comm-8barn-1871949250@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- then somebody will have to sue and get the Supreme Court involved, right? That's how we do things in this country, not by calling people "dumbass." ]]>

<![CDATA[YOU WROTE: how do you do it accurately? If you drop an object out of the spaceship, it will bounce, spoiling perfect placement. A parachute won't work because there's no atmosphere. ^if there are relfectors, then they were placed by unmanned landings.. like the russians claimed to have done.. ^ Also, scooping up moon rocks while in orbit is tricky. You can't slow down a craft to five miles an hour while it's in flight as though it were a land vehicle. ^it has been proven that fake moon rocks have been handed out under the pretense that they were real moon rocks collected on the moon.. geologists have just laughed when asked if the moon rocks were real.. expets have explained how fake moon rocks can be made.. digging and collecting rocks in 256 degree heat without any cooling system is somewhat tricky as your blood will boil and you will cook.. ^ Let's face it, men landed and they scooped up moon rocks and placed reflectors! You can't be arguing they didn't have computers but they could accomplish these difficult tasks without contradicting yourself. ^they didn't have computers, which is just more proof of the impossibility of the missions, and they didn't place relfectors because the furthest out anybody has ever gone is around 350 miles from earth where the radiation starts to become so intense that the human retina starts to see streaks of light even behind the space shuttle shielding, helmet and closed eyes.. ^ The same thing is true of the cameras. Nowadays we have computer technology so maybe we can compensate for extremes of lighting in the same field of view, but in those days all they had were cameras with one iris. They couldn't sit there for hours like Ansel Adams and compose perfectly balanced pictures. Do you comprehend this, Emma? ^the photos reveal stage props, spotlights, multiple lighting sources, impossible angles, impossible number of excellent shots (over 1 photo per minute of total time of all astronauts on moon), impossible survival of film in 256 degree heat, people not wearing the PLSS refected in visor, too many people reflected in visor, no blast crater whatsoever under the lander, no dust at all on lander, a lander made of roofing paper and tape, etc.. plenty of evidence that they are fake, as has been demonstrated by experts who are not controlled by the hoax perpetrators but whose analysis has been totally blacked out of the media.. do you comprehend that? <a href="http://www.apfn.org/apfn/moon.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.apfn.org/apfn/moon.htm</a> <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P47fB1joHSA" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P47fB1joHSA</a> TIME & MOTION STUDY: Anyone with even elemental math skills and common sense can look at the facts, do the calculations, and come to their own conclusions about the alleged MASSIVE VOLUME of lunar surface photography in such a LIMITED TIME. Here is my conclusion: IT COULD NOT BE DONE. <a href="http://www.aulis.com/skeleton.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.aulis.com/skeleton.html</a> It boils down not to just studying the photographs for signs of fakery, though I have examined every available Apollo photo for more than three years (and discovered many fakes). Very simply, it amounts to a study known to many businesses...A TIME AND MOTION STUDY. The elementary question is: was it possible to take the known number of photos (from NASA records) in the amount of time available (from NASA records)? But before you read my study, to understand it you need to know some basic information about the Apollo missions: 1. Of seven Apollo missions to put "men on the Moon", six were claimed to be "successful". (Apollo 13 was "aborted".) 2. Each of the six successful missions landed two astronauts "on the Moon" in a flimsy craft NASA originally had called the Lunar Excursion Module (LEM, later shortened to LM), an unproven craft which never had an opportunity for a lunar landing test flight. But it landed and then took off six times with spectacular "success" on Apollo missions 11 and 12, and 14 through 17...once even landing within 200 feet of a pre-selected target. 3. Two astronauts rode each LEM to the Moon surface while one remained in the orbiting Command and Service Module (CSM) awaiting their return. 4. During their Extra-Vehicular Activity (lunar surface exploration) each of the two wore a bulky inflated spacesuit with clumsy gloves, greatly limiting mobility. On their backs they wore a huge and heavy Life Support System (PLSS) backpack containing an oxygen tank and circulating water air conditioning system which pumped refrigerated water throughout the suit to counteract the 200+/- degree heat (and cold) of lunar conditions. Pumps circulated both refrigerated air and water to the liquid cooling undergarment, as well as dehumidifying, removing carbon dioxide, and providing all other functions needed to survive harsh conditions in the confining suits. 5. The principal objective of all six missions was SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH projects to be carried out by the two astronauts. Most of the projects, which numbered about a half dozen each mission, were remarkably similar on all six missions. All of these science experiments involved unpacking equipment from stowage bays, assembling it, transporting it to its location, setting it up, and then doing the experiments. As you might imagine, each of these research projects would require a major portion of the TIME of the two men for each experiment. 6. Another major project besides operation of the packaged experiments was the Geological Study, which involved searching for different specimens of rocks and soils in various locations, documenting and collecting samples to return to earth. This obviously occupied much of their TIME. 7. Considerable TIME was needed for "housekeeping chores". After landing, the LEM had to be inspected to make sure it had not been damaged. Communications equipment to put them in contact with Earth had to be set up and operated, including radio and television antennas and TV cameras. The US flag was planted in the moondust on each mission. All of this was done before any experiments were initiated. Oh, and don't forget the "ceremonial" chat with President Nixon during Apollo 11. 8. The first three missions required the astronauts to walk to each experiment location. The last three missions were supplied with a Lunar Roving Vehicle (LRV) to travel to distant locations miles away from the LEM. The partially pre-assembled LRV was attached to the outside of the LEM. The rover floor served as a pallet which was hinged to the outside of the LRV. The wheels were folded under. The "pallet" was lowered by hand to the lunar surface, and the wheels rotated into position. After the wheels were down, the vehicle had to be outfitted with all of its considerable equipment from various storage bins of the LEM. Oddly, not a single photo exists in the public domain (at least that I could find to date) of the astronauts assembling and equipping the LRVs. The battery-powered rovers had a top speed of about 8 mph, only slightly faster than walking...much like a golf cart. During the LRV travels ("traverses"), both men rode, and when moving, had no opportunity for photography. Also, the time taken in assembling the rover was not used for any photography. Though I could find no time given by NASA, surely it is reasonable to guess that it took at least an hour to unload, assemble and equip and test a rover? 9. Almost incidental to the main astronaut tasks was PHOTOGRAPHY. Each astronaut had his own camera. (Apart from the Apollo 11 EVA.) It was a square-format specially-built Hasselblad. It was mounted on a chest-plate for the astronaut to operate. The astronaut had to manually set the shutter speed and apertures while wearing bulky, pressurized gloves and without being able to see the controls. The cameras had NO VIEWFINDER, so the astronaut could only guess at what was being photographed. Each camera had a bulk film magazine holding more than a hundred exposures. The film (mainly Ektachrome color film) had a very narrow exposure range, which required PERFECT aperture and shutter settings, because according to NASA, the cameras did not have automatic exposure capability. 10. It is important to know that although each man had his own camera, they ALMOST NEVER USED THEM AT THE SAME TIME. Usually one of them was photographing the other doing some task. Therefore having two cameras DID NOT TRANSLATE TO TWICE AS MUCH TIME FOR PHOTOGRAPHY, as one might surmise. Now that you understand the missions, here is my discovery of NASA overzealousness, which has been successfully hidden till now. A TIME AND MOTION STUDY For more than three years I have been collecting and analyzing nearly all the significant photos from the Apollo missions. These official photos are readily available on multiple NASA websites for downloading. Recently I noticed they were taking up many gigabytes of memory on my computer's external hard drive, so I began organizing them and deleting duplications. I did a rough estimate of the number of Apollo photos, and was amazed that I had thousands! I visited several official NASA websites to find HOW MANY PHOTOS WERE TAKEN on the surface of the Moon. Amazingly, NASA AVOIDS THIS SUBJECT almost entirely. Two days of searching documents and text were fruitless. But Lunar Surface Journal, one of the sites, lists every photo with its file number. So I undertook to make an actual count of every photo taken by astronauts DURING EXTRA-VEHICULAR ACTIVITY (EVA), the time spent on the surface out of the LEM. Here is my actual count of EVA photos of the six missions: Apollo 11........... 121 Apollo 12........... 504 Apollo 14........... 374 Apollo 15..........1021 Apollo 16..........1765 Apollo 17..........1986 So 12 astronauts while on the Moon's surface took a TOTAL of 5771 exposures. That seemed excessively large to me, considering that their TIME on the lunar surface was limited, and the astronauts had MANY OTHER TASKS OTHER THAN PHOTOGRAPHY. So I returned to the Lunar Surface Journal to find how much TIME was available to do all the scientific tasks AS WELL AS PHOTOGRAPHY. Unlike the number of photos, this information is readily available: Apollo 11........1 EVA .....2 hours, 31 minutes......(151 minutes) Apollo 12........2 EVAs.....7 hours, 50 minutes......(470 minutes) Apollo 14........2 EVAs.....9 hours, 25 minutes......(565 minutes) Apollo 15........3 EVAs...18 hours, 30 minutes....(1110 minutes) Apollo 16........3 EVAs...20 hours, 14 minutes....(1214 minutes) Apollo 17........3 EVAs...22 hours, 04 minutes....(1324 minutes) Total minutes on the Moon amounted to 4834 minutes. Total number of photographs taken was 5771 photos. Hmmmmm. That amounts to 1.19 photos taken EVERY MINUTE of time on the Moon, REGARDLESS OF OTHER ACTIVITIES. (That requires the taking of ONE PHOTO EVERY 50 SECONDS!) Let's look at those other activities to see how much time should be deducted from available photo time: Apollo 11..........Inspect LEM for damage, deploy flag, unpack and deploy radio and television equipment, operate the TV camera (360 degree pan), establish contact with Earth (including ceremonial talk with President Nixon), unpack and deploy numerous experiment packages, find/document/collect 47.7 pounds of lunar rock samples, walk to various locations, conclude experiments, return to LEM. Apollo 12..........Inspect LEM for damage, deploy flag, unpack and deploy radio and television equipment (spend time trying to fix faulty TV camera), establish contact with Earth, unpack and deploy numerous experiment packages, walk to various locations, inspect the unmanned Surveyor 3 which had landed on the Moon in April 1967 and retrieve Surveyor parts. Deploy ALSEP package. Find/document/collect 75.7 pounds of rocks, conclude experiments, return to LEM. Apollo 14..........Inspect LEM for damage, deploy flag, unpack and deploy radio and television equipment and establish contact with Earth, unpack and assemble hand cart to transport rocks, unpack and deploy numerous experiment packages, walk to various locations. Find/document/collect 94.4 pounds of rocks, conclude experiments, return to LEM. Apollo 15..........Inspect LEM for damage, deploy flag, unpack and deploy radio and television equipment and establish contact with Earth, unpack/assemble/equip and test the LRV electric-powered 4-wheel drive car and drive it 17 miles, unpack and deploy numerous experiment packages (double the scientific payload of first three missions). Find/document/collect 169 pounds of rocks, conclude experiments, return to LEM. (The LRV travels only 8 mph*.) Apollo 16..........Inspect LEM for damage, deploy flag, unpack and deploy radio and television equipment and establish contact with Earth, unpack/assemble/equip and test the LRV electric-powered 4-wheel drive car and drive it 16 miles, unpack and deploy numerous experiment packages (double the scientific payload of first three missions, including new ultraviolet camera, operate the UV camera). Find/document/collect 208.3 pounds of rocks, conclude experiments, return to LEM. (The LRV travels only 8 mph*.) Apollo 17..........Inspect LEM for damage, deploy flag, unpack and deploy radio and television equipment and establish contact with Earth, unpack/assemble/equip and test the LRV electric-powered 4-wheel drive car and drive it 30.5 miles, unpack and deploy numerous experiment packages. Find/document/collect 243.1 pounds of rocks, conclude experiments, return to LEM. (The LRV travels only 8 mph*.) Let's arbitrarily calculate a MINIMUM time for these tasks and subtract from available photo time: Apollo 11....subtract 2 hours (120 minutes), leaving 031 minutes for taking photos Apollo 12....subtract 4 hours (240 minutes), leaving 230 minutes for taking photos Apollo 14....subtract 3 hours (180 minutes), leaving 385 minutes for taking photos Apollo 15....subtract 6 hours (360 minutes), leaving 750 minutes for taking photos Apollo 16....subtract 6 hours (360 minutes), leaving 854 minutes for taking photos Apollo 17....subtract 8 hours (480 minutes), leaving 844 minutes for taking photos So do the math: Apollo 11.......121 photos in 031 minutes............3.90 photos per minute Apollo 12.......504 photos in 230 minutes............2.19 photos per minute Apollo 14.......374 photos in 385 minutes............0.97 photos per minute Apollo 15.....1021 photos in 750 minutes............1.36 photos per minute Apollo 16.....1765 photos in 854 minutes ...........2.06 photos per minute Apollo 17.....1986 photos in 844 minutes ...........2.35 photos per minute Or, to put it more simply: Apollo 11........one photo every 15 seconds Apollo 12........one photo every 27 seconds Apollo 14........one photo every 62 seconds Apollo 15........one photo every 44 seconds Apollo 16........one photo every 29 seconds Apollo 17........one photo every 26 seconds So you decide. Given all the facts, was it possible to take that many photos in so short a time? Any professional photographer will tell you it cannot be done. Virtually every photo was a different scene or in a different place, requiring travel. As much as 30 miles travel was required to reach some of the photo sites. Extra care had to be taken shooting some stereo pairs and panoramas. Each picture was taken without a viewfinder, using manual camera settings, with no automatic metering, while wearing a bulky spacesuit and stiff clumsy gloves. The agency wants the world to believe that 5771 photographs were taken in 4834 minutes! IF NOTHING BUT PHOTOGRAPHY HAD BEEN DONE, such a feat is clearly impossible...made even more so by all the documented activities of the astronauts. Imagine...1.19 photos every minute that men were on the Moon –- that's one picture every 50 SECONDS! The secret NASA tried to hide has been discovered: The quantity of photos purporting to record the Apollo lunar EVAs could not have been taken on the Moon in such an impossible time frame. So why do these photos exist? How did these photos get made? Did ANY men go to the Moon? Or was it truly the greatest hoax ever? © 2005 Jack White Editor's Notes: *According to Andrew Chaikin, author of A Man on the Moon the LRV averaged only 5 to 7 miles per hour, which would reduce even further the time available for photography. <a href="http://www.aulis.com/skeleton.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.aulis.com/skeleton.html</a> ]]>

<![CDATA[The reason she can't expel Charlie Rangel is due to the fact he is her FUCK BUDDY. She has protected this tax cheating piece of shit for 2 years. I heard her tell A colleague that Rangel has an 11 inch cock and she loves sucking it and swallowing his big loads. She also stated that he loves eating her nasty smelling cunt. Fuck you corrupt whore.]]>

<![CDATA[then somebody will have to sue and get the Supreme Court involved, right? That's how we do things in this country, not by calling people "dumbass."]]>

<![CDATA[Sure, get going with it. Rangel just loves you.]]>

<![CDATA[ Arizona sheriff not relenting after court ruling By Jacques Billeaud and Amanda Lee Myers July 30, 2010 8:51 AM PHOENIX (AP)-- Lost in the hoopla over Arizona's immigration law is the fact that state and local authorities for years have been doing their own aggressive crackdowns in the busiest illegal gateway into the country. Nowhere in the U.S. is local enforcement more present than in metropolitan Phoenix, where Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio routinely carries out sweeps, some in Hispanic neighborhoods, to arrest illegal immigrants. The tactics have made him the undisputed poster boy for local immigration enforcement and the anger that so many authorities feel about the issue. "It's my job," said Arpaio, standing beside a sheriff's truck that has a number for an immigration hot line written on its side. "I have two state (immigration) laws that I am enforcing. It's not federal, it's state." A ruling Wednesday by a federal judge put on hold parts of the new law that would have required officers to dig deeper into the fight against illegal immigration. Arizona says it was forced to act because the federal government isn't doing its job to fight immigration. The issue led to demonstrations across the country Thursday, including one directed at Arpaio in Phoenix in which protesters beat on the metal door of a jail and chanted, "Sheriff Joe, we are here. We will not live in fear." Meanwhile, Gov. Jan Brewer's lawyers went to court to overturn the judge's ruling so they can fight back against what the Republican calls an "invasion" of illegal immigrants. Ever since the main flow of illegal immigrants into the country shifted to Arizona a decade ago, state politicians and local police have been feeling pressure to confront the state's border woes. In addition to Arpaio's crackdowns, other efforts include a steady stream of busts by the state and local police of stash houses where smugglers hide illegal immigrants. The state attorney general has taken a money-wiring company to civil court on allegations that smugglers used their service to move money to Mexico. And a county south of Phoenix has its sheriff's deputies patrol dangerous smuggling corridors. The Arizona Legislature have enacted a series of tough-on-immigration measures in recent years that culminated with the law signed by Brewer in April, catapulting the Republican to the national political stage. But the king of local immigration enforcement is still Arpaio. Arpaio, a 78-year-old ex-federal drug agent who fashions himself as a modern-day John Wayne, launched his latest sweep Thursday afternoon, sending about 200 sheriff's deputies and trained volunteers out across metro Phoenix to look for traffic violators who may be here illegally. Deputy Bob Dalton and volunteer Heath Kowacz spotted a driver with a cracked windshield in a poor Phoenix neighborhood near a busy freeway. Dalton triggered the red and blue police lights and pulled over 28-year-old Alfredo Salas, who was born in Mexico but has lived in Phoenix with a resident alien card since 1993. Dalton gave him a warning after Salas produced his license and registration and told him to get the windshield fixed. Salas, a married father of two who installs granite, told The Associated Press that he was treated well but he wondered whether he was pulled over because his truck is a Ford Lobo. "It's a Mexican truck so I don't know if they saw that and said, 'I wonder if he has papers or not,'" Salas said. "If that's the case, it kind of gets me upset." Sixty percent of the nearly 1,000 people arrested in the sweeps since early 2008 have been illegal immigrants. Thursday's dragnet led to four arrests, but it wasn't clear if any of them were illegal immigrants. Critics say deputies racially profile Hispanics. Arpaio says deputies approach people only when they have probable cause. "Sheriff Joe Arpaio and some other folks there decided they can make a name for themselves in terms of the intensity of the efforts they're using," said Benjamin Johnson, executive director of the pro-immigrant Immigration Policy Center. "There's no way to deny that. There are a lot of people getting caught up in these efforts." The Justice Department launched an investigation of his office nearly 17 months ago over allegations of discrimination and unconstitutional searches and seizures. Although the department has declined to detail its investigation, Arpaio believes it centers on his sweeps. Arpaio feels no reservations about continuing to push the sweeps, even after the federal government stripped his power to let 100 deputies make federal immigration arrests. Unable to make arrests under a federal statute, the sheriff instead relied on a nearly 5-year-old state law that prohibits immigrant smuggling. He has also raided 37 businesses in enforcing a state law that prohibits employers from knowingly hiring illegal immigrants. "I'm not going to brag," Arpaio said. "Just look at the record. I'm doing what I feel is right for the people of Maricopa County." TrackBack URL: <a href="http://www.gopusa.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/3878" rel="nofollow">http://www.gopusa.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/3878</a> 3 Comments killadeaux | July 30, 2010 10:48 AM | Reply Governor Brewer and Sheriff Arpaio please stick to your principles and continue your fight to stop the entry into the U.S.of people intent on not respecting our immigration laws. If ICE refuses to cooperate in deporting these criminals, put them on school buses in shackles with armed guards and drop them off at Obama's front door. Let him deal with it. Srini Varadarajan | July 30, 2010 11:32 AM | Reply I second killadeaux' comment. Brewer/Arpaio (or Arpaio/Brewer) 2012! Winston on Truth | July 30, 2010 12:21 PM | Reply It's too bad that Sheriff Arpaio and Tom Tancredo are not President and Vice President, respectively...and respectfully. Obama is IMPEACHABLE and Eric Holder should be in federal prison. Read more: <a href="http://www.gopusa.com/news/2010/07/arizona-sheriff-not-relenting-after-court-ruling.php#ixzz0vBoB1tOA" rel="nofollow">http://www.gopusa.com/news/2010/07/arizona-sheriff-not-relenting-after-court-ruling.php#ixzz0vBoB1tOA</a> ]]>

<![CDATA[ The Enablers of Charlie Rangel By Michelle Malkin July 30, 2010 7:05 AM House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is the world's worst cleaning lady. How has she fulfilled her vaunted promise to "drain the swamp" and preside over the "most ethical Congress in history"? By shrugging her shoulders, downplaying the gravity of myriad ethics charges against corruptocrat Democratic Rep. Charlie Rangel and waiting for the "political chips" to "fall where they may." Imagine a custodial service that fixed toilet clogs by letting the overflowing waste and polluted waters "fall where they may." At a press conference to preempt the bipartisan House ethics panel's announcement of 13 ethics and federal regulation charges against Rangel on Thursday afternoon, Pelosi claimed to take "great pride" in her swamp-draining record. Unblinkingly, she cited the House trial against Rangel as proof that the "process" is working. But that beleaguered panel has been pathetically understaffed, has dragged its feet for two years on the Rangel case and has administered more halfhearted wrist-slaps than all the pushover parents on a season of "Nanny 911." Clinging bitterly to the moral equivalence card, Pelosi carped about Bush-era GOP corruption. (Cue a chorus of "Let's do the time warp again!") Her lips were sealed, however, on the continuing wheeling and dealing behind the scenes between Rangel's lobbyist-funded lawyers and the ethics panel on a deal to avoid a congressional trial. A full-blown public trial would thoroughly air his self-dealing, habitual bad-faith failures to report income, multiple House gift ban and solicitation ban violations, flouting of franking privilege and letterhead rules, and a fundamental "pattern of indifference or disregard for the laws, rules and regulations of the United States and House of Representatives," as the House ethics statement of violations put it. But, hey, what about that GEORGE W. BUSH, eh, Pelosi? Bush-whack all you want. The Rangel stench is overwhelming. Along the way, Rangel has obstructed House investigators, failed to produce documents and refused previous settlement offers -- prompting House ethics investigative subcommittee member Rep. Jo Bonner, R-Ala., to reject the Rangel-as-victim narrative. Misfortune didn't befall Rangel. He chose his path. While bleeding-heart lefties in the media, like The Washington Post's Dana Milbank, mourn entrenched incumbent Rangel's sudden fall (he "took 36 years to climb to the top, only to lose it all in an instant"), there is nothing sudden about the entitlement sclerosis that took hold of his career. And there is nothing ethical about the Democratic enablers who have shown their own long pattern of indifference or disregard for clean, open, transparent government. I remind you that in March, Speaker Mop & Glo was minimizing Rangel's mountain of alleged transgressions by pooh-poohing that "it was a violation of the rules of the House. It was not something that jeopardized our country in any way." GOP Rep. Mike McCaul, a member of the House ethics investigative subcommittee, begged to differ. "Credibility is what's at stake here; the very credibility of the House itself," he said at the hearing announcing the baker's dozen of ethics charges. Echoing Pelosi's nonchalance, Democratic Rep. Maxine Waters sniffed that "many members" of the House are as habitually sloppy and apathetic toward House ethics rules as Rangel -- her good friend and Congressional Black Caucus ally. Since Day One, the identity-politics caucus that Rangel helped found has stood by his side and blamed anti-black bias for Rangel's troubles. Rangel likened media scrutiny of his shady rent-controlled apartment deals and tax troubles to a "lynching." CBC member Chaka Fattah, D-Pa., called it a "witch hunt." And an unidentified, tinfoil-hatted black House Democrat told Politico: "It looks as if there is somebody out there who understands what the rules (are) and sends names to the ethics committee with the goal of going after the (CBC)." Never mind that the supposedly bigoted House ethics panel exonerated four CBC members of their participation in corporate-funded tax junkets to the Caribbean. When the polls are down and damning evidence keeps mounting, first yell "BUSH!" Then yell "RAAAAACIST!" As last-minute deal-making between Rangel and the foxes guarding the congressional henhouse continues, more and more Americans are coming to the same conclusions: House-soilers can't be cleaners. Voters, not Washington politicians, are the ultimate ethics committee. --- Michelle Malkin is the author of "Culture of Corruption: Obama and his Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks & Cronies" (Regnery 2010). Her e-mail address is malkinblog@gmail.com. TrackBack URL: <a href="http://www.gopusa.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/3868" rel="nofollow">http://www.gopusa.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/3868</a> 6 Comments Rhea | July 30, 2010 8:58 AM | Reply Great commentary Michele. Just wait. Charlie Rangel will make some backroom deal and get off with a slap on the wrist. It has happened before when these pinheads are caught with their hands in the cookie jar. As Bill Oreilly put it, "it is the powerful protecting the powerful" Mort_f | July 30, 2010 9:20 AM | Reply Go back to square 1. Rangel took over the seat of the convicted Adam Clayton Powell, Jr. He was a charter member of Blackmail, Inc. From one of the 'safest', for an incumbent, seats in the House. But probably pointless to go back further than these 13 counts, the Statute of Limitations has probably expired. More shame to my alma mater for even accepting that pork barrel edifice with his name 'honoring' it. ter334 | July 30, 2010 9:47 AM | Reply Unfortunately this is politics as usual for the liberals, perhaps extreme extreme. Everything they do and say is political and always has been. Non-liberals have been lulled into complacency for decades by their sweet lullaby. Which has been: We are from the govt and here to help the poor, the victims and so forth. It seems to me the internet has opened the door for the non-liberals to engage them in a battle of wits. They of course are unarmed since they know nothing about issues and never discuss them. This battle is for, as the guy said at the GOP Convention several years ago, the soul of America. What non-liberals are up against is "fortress" DC with the press as the American liberal "revolutionary guards". Think positive! After the first stage collapse of the liberal empire in Nov, think of all the expose of their dirt that can be made and there will be a real dog fight in Congress until O is gone! The State of AZ is leading the assault to expose the liberal empire! They have forced the feds hand using a legal challenge. Actually this dog fight in Congress is what should be 'politics as usual'. They are supposed to discuss and debate issues, not just be led to a 'shower' by the liberals! Bipartisan is dead, that is if it was ever alive other than as political ammo by liberals. Liberals don't want to discuss issues! Because they can't. onewildman | July 30, 2010 9:57 AM | Reply Rangel put the rope around his own neck. No one did this to. He is a cheater who like all cheaters eventually got caught. Anyone one who votes for this votes for dishonesty and corruption. he needs to banished from government never to be seen or heard of again. As for the Black Caucus they say don't rush to judgment and I say this has gone on for more than six months. Their is no rush to judgment unlike the way their racist caucus dose. Yes they are a racist group just like their black colleges and should be treated as such. Send Rangel to jail and throw away the key. mawbear428 | July 30, 2010 10:31 AM | Reply Great Article! The sad think in this whole Rangel mess is that even if he is voted out or thrown out of Congress, another just like him will be voted in his place. This is just the dynamics of that district I believe. Cry "racist" all they want but blacks are more racist than whites now that O has been put in power. FlaJim | July 30, 2010 10:45 AM | Reply Rangel, among other things, apparently 'forgot' to declare $600,000 in income over the past several years. Gee, you know, that happens to me all the time. Those little things just slip past when you're so busy. He was also too busy to notice that he was violating House rules on vacations to the Caribbean, courtesy of lobbyists. His staff should have alerted him. You just can't hire good help these days. He should be tried and sentenced by the Congressional White Caucus. Oh, silly me: A CWC would be a bigoted racist organization, wouldn't it? The arrogance, duplicity, and hypocracy of people like these never ceases to amaze me, although I should be used to it by now. Read more: <a href="http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/2010/07/malkin-the-enablers-of-charlie-rangel.php#ixzz0vBnInFrL" rel="nofollow">http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/2010/07/malkin-the-enablers-of-charlie-rangel.php#ixzz0vBnInFrL</a> ]]>

<![CDATA[Sorry to hear.....dumbass.....that you have been reduced to one thought. Lets see.....maybe you should read this real slow.......The AZ law is unconstitutional........which has absoultly nothing to do with where I live........who lives next door to me.... how I conduct yourself personally with regards to associating with the illegal’s ...or the fact that you are a dumbass. None of that changes the fact that the law is unconstitutional. Get it? You seem to be saying that it is okay for a state to throw the U.S. Constitution out the window......make up there own laws on issues that are clearly left to the federal government..........dumbass! Now lets look at a bit of hypocrisy. You state: "An armchair self-righteous social commentator more than willing to attack those who won't agree with you but obviously a coward in real life." which describes you to a tee, ie this statement "You are a child, an angry dissatisfied juvenile ....". You have know idea what I am like in real life and if you would ever like to meet to see if I am a coward, just let me know. And a bit more hypocrisy: Insulting is what you're all about, in fact you've made a profession...... and get this "and by calling you Prof. Shitology is only stating a well documented fact. And some final hypocrisy: How you can extract yourself from further exposure of your baseless prattle. Jesus there are dumbasses here!!!!! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 2010-07-30, 10:21AM PDT Reply to: comm-9jmpx-1871767133@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- How you can extract yourself from further exposure of your baseless prattle. Your'e not very clever nor credible, the fact that you haven't given and accounting how you'd conduct yourself personally with regards to associating with the illegals you defend is a clear example of someone who is all talk but has no true conviction expressed by actions. An armchair self-righteous social commentator more than willing to attack those who won't agree with you but obviously a coward in real life. False bravado to your claimed personal wealth which you think will impress others (a childish display) but in fact makes you look petty. Insulting is what you're all about, in fact you've made a profession of it and by calling you Prof. Shitology is only stating a well documented fact. All in all you like too many Liberal minded people lack depth and true conviction and when this is exposed you're reduced to one or two sentences of meaningless insults that you think will distract from the emptiness you post. I expect more insults and meaningless statements because even when beaten you can't be honest with yourself, worried others will continue to notice the swallow nature of your personality and hoping somehow you can be redeemed in their eyes. You are destined to repeat your bad practices because you know no other way and haven't the courage to learn understanding of others. You are a child, an angry dissatisfied juvenile who when unable to convince others to think as you do, lashes out in anger and frustration. I'm sure your next post will confirm this, you are a servant to your emotions. ]]>

<![CDATA[ Another Day, Another Federal Assault on Liberty By David Limbaugh July 30, 2010 7:10 AM Yesterday's federal court decision to enjoin enforcement of the Arizona immigration law is the latest example of a virtually unchecked renegade federal government waging war against the states and against the liberties of its citizens. We've seen that Obama will exercise any power he can get away with, from strong-arming secured creditors and favoring unions as he gobbled up automakers to making a mockery of due process with his Oval Office shakedown of BP. But he might have reached a new low with his assaults on the sovereignty of the people of Arizona. Indeed, Judge Susan Bolton's disgraceful decision to grant an injunction against Arizona's new immigration law is, in the words of Mark Levin, "abominable," but let's not forget that this case wouldn't have been before Judge Bolton if Obama's Justice Department hadn't initiated it. And let's not pretend that Obama's motives are anything other than political, the law and the rule of law be damned. He told Sen. Jon Kyl in a private meeting that he was unwilling to secure our borders because it would decrease his chances to pass "comprehensive immigration reform." So when Arizona attempted to exercise a little self-help and work on securing its own border by passing a law carefully crafted to mirror the federal immigration law and encourage its enforcement, the all-powerful Obama feds came down on it like a furious king against his disobedient subjects. In a saner world, freedom lovers could have rested easy, knowing that an impartial, Constitution-respecting judge would summarily reject the administration's unlawful scheme to thwart Arizona's sovereignty by superimposing its own nonenforcement policy. But in her decision, Clinton appointee Bolton demonstrated how dangerous judicial activism can be to our individual liberties and democratic processes. It's one thing for a court to invalidate a law because it doesn't pass constitutional muster; it's quite another for it to misstate the facts, the legislation and the Constitution to reach a preordained decision. Just consider three outrages of this decision highlighted by other commentators, any of which, individually, makes a mockery of justice. Andy McCarthy properly observes that Judge Bolton stretched the federal pre-emption doctrine to absurd limits. Under Bolton's specious reasoning, state law must be struck down not only if it is inconsistent with federal law, which the Arizona law is not, but also if it somehow contradicts federal law enforcement practices. Because the Obama feds refused, as a matter of policy, to enforce their own law against illegal immigration, the state could not be allowed to pass a law promoting enforcement. Note that nothing in the actual Constitution or case law justifies such an extrapolation of pre-emption doctrine. But such trifles don't impede an administration and court determined to keep the immigration floodgates open at any cost. Mark Levin notes that Judge Bolton correctly enunciated the rigorous legal standard required for a plaintiff to succeed in a "facial challenge" to a law's constitutionality but then proceeded to ignore the rules she had just affirmed. She acknowledged that for the federal government to have prevailed, it would have had to show the law could never be applied in a constitutional fashion. That is, "a facial challenge must fail where a statute has a 'plainly legitimate sweep.'" But she ignored that limitation on her authority, just as she violated another principle she paid lip service to in her opinion: that the court was not to speculate about hypothetical cases. Heather Mac Donald exposes Judge Bolton's acquiescence to the Obama administration's "carefully cultivated fiction" that the administration's primary motive with the lawsuit was to prevent the application of the law to legal aliens. The judge ignored uncontroverted testimony and legal briefs from Arizona officials stating that only people who were reasonably suspected to be illegally in the country would be required to prove their legal status. So to protect legal aliens from a law that doesn't apply to them, she refuses to apply the law to illegals. Cynical observers of the political scene lazily dismiss each unfolding Obama outrage as merely Washington politics as usual. But with this administration, we're witnessing power grabs that are different in kind rather than degree. Our liberties depend on our preserving the integrity of the Constitution and the mechanisms it established to deter tyranny. To the extent we dismantle those safeguards, we imperil our freedoms. When the political class is filled with those who are ideologically committed to certain political ends irrespective of the legality of the means used to achieve them, our system of checks and balances breaks down, which is one reason John Adams warned, "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." November's elections cannot come fast enough.--- David Limbaugh is a writer, author and attorney. His new book, "Crimes Against Liberty," will come out in August. To find out more about David Limbaugh, please visit his website at www.DavidLimbaugh.com. TrackBack URL: <a href="http://www.gopusa.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/3867" rel="nofollow">http://www.gopusa.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/3867</a> 5 Comments oldcuz | July 30, 2010 9:44 AM | Reply Gosh sure didn't hear much about this on the Lame Stream Media. Mostly we heard about how Obama appeared on the view with Behar and four of her other Obama worshipers, poor Elizabeth was the only one that asked a single pertinent question. FlaJim | July 30, 2010 10:24 AM | Reply A good part of the blame can be put on Republicans who, in the past, have lazily allowed dolts and idealogues like Judge Bolton to be confirmed, saying that it is a presidential prerogative to appoint these people, after all. It underlines the importance of the fight to block Kagan from the Supreme Court. It's obviously not that these people don't know the law; they willfully ignore or thwart it. AZ could still declare they find the judge's decision to be unsupported by the Constitution and ignore it. States are sovereign and have a responsibility and right to protect themselves. bgannyf | July 30, 2010 10:34 AM | Reply I keep asking myself - with all the blatent disregard of the American People, the abuse and overstepping of his constitutional authority why is this man still in office? Why has he not been impeached and deported all at the same time? It will take us years to undo everything he has done in the last year and a half. Loren Mach | July 30, 2010 10:43 AM | Reply So what are the Republicans going to do about this situation. Obama and his Marxist handlers/Czars have all the marbles and are in the process of tearing our Constitution to shreads. You people must have some power left somewhere so why aren't you using it. It's time to get MEAN and VOCAL and raise HELL and question their every move in court just like the Marxist/Progressive/Liberals have done for the last 50 years. Time to stir the pot and get the country back on track, make some noise. STOP rubberstamping Supreme Court Judge nominees. Get your RINOS in line (ie:Snow, Lincoln, Nelson) with the constitution by getting some leadership. Quit hiding under the table while Obama and Company steal all the food, money and Nation.Start investigating the Main Stream Media for not doing their jobs of reporting news and informing the public rather than simply manufacturing news for the Left. Start actions inwhich funding is pulled from the ACLU. You cannot make nice with the people now in power as they are more of a threat to our nation than the Islamic Terrorist/Political Religion. Since when does illegal activity have more power, rights and control over legal taxpaying citizens. It's time for you Republican boys and girls to get some BALLS and do some good for our Nation rather than being selfserving like the Marxist Left. What the hell are you waiting on. Obama is in the process of rendering your jobs in both the Senate and Congress extinct. Example: He can get his Cap and Tax with out your help just by going via the EPA. You people gave the EPA the power via your stupid legislation so why does the Nation need you now if you keep giving all your power away. rreligion ChuckL | July 30, 2010 12:07 PM | Reply All Federal judges are appointed to serve during "good behaviour". It is not a lifetime appointment. It is a duty of the Congress to determine "good behaviour" and remove any judge not displaying "good behaviour". In the matter of a constitutional challenge, it would seem that "good behaviour" would be determined by how well the Constitution was followed. It follows therefore that "Not good behaviour" which is grounds for removal from office would consist of finding a way to circumvent the Constitution. Article 1, Section 3, final paragraph provides the penalty for conviction in a case of impeachment. Unfortunately, this problem exists only because the Congress has refused to do its Constitutional duty. AND voters have returned them anyway. I believe that this is because these senators and congressmen have been able to redefine their duties from maintaining the United States as a Constitutional Republic under the terms of our existing Constitution and turned these Federal Duties into a job that can only be described as: "Get for my state (and of course, for me) everything that I can, and to hell with the rest of the nation." We are a federation of sovereign states unified for the protection of the states by doing for the nation only that which needs to be done on a national basis and to promote the "GENERAL WELFARE" by keeping the playing field for business level in all of the states. Please note that the adjective "general" prohibits any specificity in any welfare law. Specificity is reserved to the states. Among other things which are specific and therefore not authorized by the Constitution are: The Social IN-Security check upon which I am now dependent; the National Education Association's federal funding; Federal Unemployment payments; Medicare; Education funding; Disaster insurance for those who build in insecure areas; and there are many others, too many to list. If the Federal Government only spent what is authorized by the Constitution our Federal tax rate could be less than 10% on all individuals and businesses. If this were done, then we could again build the military equipment that would keep us secure from attack and allow us to insure that we, not someone else could quickly dominate any air space that became contested. Currently we are on a path to give up this capability to the current Russian aircraft that they readily sell to all comers, and which can already destroy all of our aircraft except the (Obama discontinued) F-22. New Russian designs will place the F-22 in question. The "new" F-35 is simply a non-entity. The F-35 is slower than a 1956 F-106, which also had a single engine and was capable of supercruise and had a top speed of Mach 2.31. The f-35 can not supercruise and has a top speed of Mach 1.6. In aerodynamic maneuverability the F-35 is inferior to the Vietnam era fighters that avoided dogfights with Migs because the Migs had much better maneuverability. Our pilots won because they used the much better speed of our aircraft to "hit and run" Remember that the only jobs defined by the Constitution are: Defense of the Country, and maintenance of "Post roads", which can be interpreted as connecting post offices for mail or connecting military posts. Other things that can be done are only Constitutional if they comply with Article 1, Section 8. Much of the problem has resulted from the Congress' refusal to clearly and completely write the laws that they pass and instead creating an agency with the law to actually write the law with "regulations" which "have the force of law" I guess that it is easier that way. Thinking is not required. I believe that a large part of the problem could be solved by prohibiting federal pensions to all elected officials, and limiting all others, except military, to not more than the current "poverty level" A Federal job should not be a ticket to a lifetime of luxury. Remember -OBAMA - DIVIDE AND CONQUER We The People ... Vote all incumbents out in November! Read more: <a href="http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/2010/07/limbaugh-another-day-another-federal-assault-on-liberty.php#ixzz0vBlIGjsL" rel="nofollow">http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/2010/07/limbaugh-another-day-another-federal-assault-on-liberty.php#ixzz0vBlIGjsL</a> ]]>

<![CDATA[David Ray Griffin - 9/11 The Myth and The Reality 1:38:42 - 1 year ago Great presentation by David Ray Griffin about 9/11. <a href="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6837001821567284154#docid=-4069714733894389451" rel="nofollow">http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6837001821567284154#docid=-4069714733894389451</a> Book TV 9/11 Fraud: David Ray Griffin, Part 1 <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCHN-1Yk5LI" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCHN-1Yk5LI</a>]]>

<![CDATA[A Brilliant Ph.D Laughs AT The Official 9/11 Story By: Dr. Albert D Pastore on: 30.06.2008 Were The Hijackers Really Arabs? There Are Only Two Logical Perpetrators Of 9/11 Basically your two choices are Muslim terrorists, or Israeli-sponsored Zionists. The True Culprits Want To Be Unknown We know this because Bin Laden strongly denied any involvement in 9-11 and suggested that the Zionists were behind it. It is widely believed throughout the Arab and Muslim world (and even much of Europe) that Israeli and U.S. elements staged 9-11 as a pretext for a war against the Islamic world. The Zionists and the U.S. scoff at this idea and insist that Muslim terrorists carried out 9-11. Too Much Planted Evidence Given that both Group 1 or Group 2 would be in serious trouble if it were discovered to be responsible for 9-11, and given the fact that each group blames the other, we would therefore expect the true culprit to attempt to divert the investigation towards the innocent group and away from itself. This trick is as old as crime itself. As surely as night follows day, a phony evidence trail would had to have surfaced following the 9-11 operation. The True Culprit Laid The False Evidence Trail By simply reversing the direction to which the phony trail points towards, we can logically deduce who the true culprits were. Whichever group has phony-looking evidence directed towards it must therefore be the innocent group. Find the phony trail and you will find the guilty party. Mossad Agents In The Country A few weeks before 9-11, Israeli Mossad officials flew to the U.S. and met with leaders of the FBI and CIA. The Mossad claimed that a major terrorist attack was imminent and that the culprits would be Osama Bin Laden and Iraq's Saddam Hussein. They gave no other details.(2) Did Bin Laden Call His Momma? After the attacks, there were widely publicized reports that the government had a tape recording of Bin laden calling his mother just a few days before the attacks and telling her: "Something big is about to happen and you won't be hearing from me for a while." Arabs Left Flight Manuals In Their Cars Hours after the attacks, investigators received a report of a suspicious car left behind at Boston's Logan Airport by a group of belligerent Arabs. Inside the car, investigators find an Arab language flight manual. Suicide Pilots Leave Korans In Their Cars Investigators then find a suitcase supposedly "forgotten" by Mohammed Atta, "ringleader" of the suicide hijackers, inside the suitcase they find a Koran, a fuel consumption calculator, a suicide note, and more Arab flight manuals. Why would they need a suicide note? Arab Letters Survive The Crash At the crash site in Pennsylvania, investigators find an incriminating letter written by one of the hijackers. The destruction at the crash site was so complete that the largest piece of human remains found was an 8-inch piece of spine.Yet the letter survived the awesome crash and incineration unscathed. Passport From The WTC Days after the attacks, a slightly burned passport belonging to one of the "Saudi hijackers" is miraculously found just a few blocks away from the rubble of the World Trade Center. Zionist FBI Director FBI Director Mueller even admitted that identity thefts were used in connection with 9-11. (9) As many as 7 of the 19 "Arab hijackers" are alive and well and some had reported their passports stolen in 1999. (10) Weeks after 9-11, Anthrax letters killed 5 people. The wording of the letters was designed to implicate Muslims. "Death to America. Death to Israel. Allah is great" It has long since been established that the anthrax came from a US army lab and was not mailed by Muslims. (11) The Zionist-run Pentagon claimed to have found a "confession video" from Osama Bin Laden. How convenient that the man who was clever enough to pull off 9-11 would suddenly become so careless and leave a self-incriminating video laying around in Afghanistan. Independent translations of the barely-audible video later exposed the US translation as "manipulative and inaccurate" (12). Other analyses of the video raises even more questions of fraud and doctoring. It is then revealed that investigators also found a business card belonging to one of the hijackers at the Pennsylvania crash site. On the back of this miraculous business card is a telephone number linking one of the hijackers to the "20th hijacker" Zaccarias Moussaoui. Also at the Pennsylvania crash site, another miracle passport belonging to "hijacker pilot" Ziad Jarrah was found. Why were these hijackers carrying passports for internal domestic flights anyway? The Friday before the attacks, three loud-mouthed, drunken "hijackers" ( Mohammed Atta and the Al-Shehhi brothers) make a memorable scene at a restaurant in Hollywood, Florida. (keep the name Hollywood, Florida in your mind for a moment) The London Telegraph (and many other sources) tells us: "Mohammed Atta, 33, who almost certainly was the Florida-trained pilot who rammed American Airlines Flight 11 into the north tower of the World Trade Centre, his cousin Marwan al-Shehhi, 23, and an Arab believed to be a brother of al-Shehhi, appeared to have been in a bibulous celebratory mood last week. Tony Amos, the manager of Shuckums Oyster Bar and Restaurant in Hollywood (Florida) just north of Miami, was interviewed by the FBI and he and his barman and a waitress all identified Atta and his cousin as some hard drinkers who propped up the bar last Friday. Atta's bill for three hours of vodka drinking came to $48. When he drunkenly disputed the charge, Mr Amos intervened. "Of course I can pay the bill," Atta told him. "I'm an airline pilot." Devout fundamentalist Muslim "martyrs" drinking vodka for three hours? And notice how "Mohammed Atta" purposely goes out of his way to tell the manager he was "an airline pilot". This is very similar to the way in which he purposely told his flight school instructor he was "leaving for Boston". Devout Muslims At A Strip Club Days Before Meeting Allah? The night before the attacks, three loud-mouthed "hijackers" (one of them again being the "ringleader" Mohammed Atta) visited a Florida strip club where they again cause a scene and make a deliberate point of telling people about a pending terror attack. They then conveniently "forget" yet another Koran at the bar! CBS News reported on September 14, 2001: "The three men spewed anti-American sentiments in a bar and talked of impending bloodshed the night before the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, a Daytona Beach strip club manager interviewed by the FBI said Thursday." "They were talking about what a bad place America is. They said 'Wait 'til tomorrow. America is going to see bloodshed,"' said John Kap, manager of the Pink Pony and Red Eyed Jack's Sports Bar. Kap said they made the claims to a bartender and a patron. Kap said he told FBI investigators the men in his bar spent $200 to $300 apiece on lap dances and drinks, paying with credit cards. Kap said he gave the FBI credit card receipts, photocopied driver's licenses, a business card left by one man and a copy of the Quran - the sacred book of Islam - that was left at the bar. (16) (emphasis added) This one takes the grand prize! Devout, fundamentalist Muslim "martyrs" not only getting drunk, but fondling naked dancers just hours before they were scheduled to meet with God! These highly-skilled secret operatives then jeopardize their mission by drawing attention to themselves while publicly bashing America and boasting about pending bloodshed, to take place the following day? And what on earth were they doing in Florida instead of Boston the eve of 9-11 anyway? Didn't they realize that if either of their two early morning connecting flights (first to Maine, and then to Boston) were a bit delayed the next morning, their whole operation would have been at risk? And finally, they oh-so-conveniently forget their business cards and Koran at the bar! This Mohammed Atta character sure is an absent-minded fellow isn't he? He "loses" his passport in 1999, he "forgets" how to speak German when his flight school instructor tries to make small talk with him (see Chapter 11 ), he "forgets" his suitcase before the 9-11 attacks (or perhaps he remembered at the last moment that he wasn't going to need a suitcase for a suicide mission!) he "forgets" a Koran in a Florida strip club, and then "forgets" yet another Koran in Boston, and also "forgets" his Arabic language flight manual and "forgets" his fuel consumption calculator! How did this guy ever get to be an electrical engineer? My dear reader- no disrespect intended- but if you can't see through these little stunts as the obvious work of a team of "false flag" imposters, then you are either truly stupid or willfully blind. So who, if not Mohammed Atta and his friends, could these drunken, womanizing, Koran-toting, "Muslims" in Florida actually have been? An excellent May 7, 2002 story written by Christopher Ketcham of Salon Magazine provides a clue. Ketcham writes about the Israeli "art student" spy ring that was uncovered in 2001. In an article entitled "The Israeli Art Student Mystery", Ketcham informs us: "For almost two years, hundreds of young Israelis falsely claiming to be art students haunted federal offices...... No one knows why — and no one seems to want to find out. Mossad Had An Apartment Near The Arabs "In HOLLYWOOD, (Florida) several students lived at 4220 Sheridan St., just down the block from the 3389 Sheridan St. apartment where terrorist mastermind Mohammed Atta holed up with three other Sept. 11 plotters. Many of the students, the DEA report noted, had backgrounds in Israeli military intelligence and/or electronics surveillance; one was the son of a two-star Israeli general, and another had served as a bodyguard to the head of the Israeli army.(emphasis added) 17 Need I connect these dots for you too, or are you now seeing the picture? How appropriate that these Israeli actors should stage their stunts in a town called "Hollywood"! These are just a few of the highly suspect pieces of "evidence" that have turned up in the wake of 9-11. ON THE OTHER HAND, Nothing resembling such a phony, transparent, and ridiculous trail has been found to point towards Israelis and Zionists. No Jewish skullcaps left behind at the airport, no Jewish Torahs found in "forgotten" suitcases, no six-pointed Stars of David found at crash sites, no mysterious videos of rabbis taking credit for 9-11, no Israeli passports turning up at the WTC or other crash sites, etc The Muslims Were Framed By The Zionists Anti-Semitism you say? Then perhaps you prefer to hear it from a Jewish scholar instead. In an article entitled: The Zionist Roots of the War on Terror, Dr. Henry Makow, (inventor of the board game Scruples) writes: Until recently I accepted Israel's self-image as a beleaguered, peace-loving nation in a sea of blood thirsty Arabs. The idea that this tiny state had imperialist designs seemed ludicrous. But what if, unknown to most people, including Israelis, the world's power elite were using Israel to advance their plan for New World Order?... Israel's image of vulnerability is a ruse. Israel has always planned to become the dominant power in the region, and "invented dangers" in order to dupe its citizens and provoke wars. ...The Mossad's fingerprints are all over 9-11." (emphasis added) (18) According to Abe Foxman's and the ADL's dubious logic, Makow must therefore be a "self-hating" Jew. "I didn't do it!" ..... "Don't look at me, Goyim!" Is it just a coincidence that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld announced that the Pentagon lost $2.3 trillion of the taxpayer's dollars the day before the attacks and that the section of the Pentagon that got hit housed a lot of accountants, bookkeepers and budget analysts and was also the end of the fiscal year and important budget information was in the damaged area?`~ed. Footnotes 1..Unmat (Pakistan). From BBC Monitoring Service. September 28,2001. Google users enter: bin laden already said I am not involved 2. See Chapter 9, Footnote #4 3.CNN.com - "Sources dispute reports of bin Laden phone call" - October 2, 2001 By David Ensor and Eileen O'Connor, CNN National Security Correspondent , Google: Sources dispute reports of Bin laden phone call mother 4. BBC News | AMERICAS | The investigation and the evidence Friday, 5 October, 2001, Google: BBC the investigation and the evidence 5. BBC News, See Chapter 11, Footnotes #1 and #2 6. ABCNEWS.com : "Handwritten Letter Instructed Hijackers Words of Terror , Handwritten Letter Gave Hijackers Religious, Practical Instructions" Sept. 28, 2001 7. Mirror (England) - "WHAT DID HAPPEN TO FLIGHT 93? RICHARD WALLACE," US Editor, examines riddle of hijacked jet as he visits crash site, December 2001 8.BBC News | AMERICAS | Giuliani holds on to hope ,16 September, 2001 Google: BBC Giuliani holds on to hope 9. See Chapter 11 footnotes #8 and #9 10. See Chapter 11 footnotes #5, #6, and #7 11. See Chapter 18, Footnote #8 12. See Chapter 15, Footnotes #3, #4, and #5 13. Washington Post, "US says Card Links Mouassaoui, Hijackers," By Tom Jackman, September 25, 2002 14.CNN.com - September 11 hijacker questioned in January 2001 - August 1, 2002,By Sheila MacVicar and Caroline Faraj 15.The Telegraph, (England) "FBI tracks down the Florida lair of flying school terrorists" By Ian Ball in Miami. Google: Mohammed Atta vodka Hollywood 16.CBS News | Focus On Florida | September 14, 2001 08:22:41 By Brendan Farrington MMI The Associated Press. 17.Salon.com News | The Israeli "art student" mystery , Salon Magazine, May 7 , 2002, By Christopher Ketchum, Google: salon magazine Israeli art student mystery 18. Dr. Henry Makow. November 18, 2001. "The Zionist Roots of the War on Terror". www.savethemales.ca <a href="http://judicial-inc.biz/86Dr.Albert.Pastore.htm" rel="nofollow">http://judicial-inc.biz/86Dr.Albert.Pastore.htm</a> <a href="http://www.iraq-war.ru/article/168489" rel="nofollow">http://www.iraq-war.ru/article/168489</a>]]>

<![CDATA[The funny thing about the Wikipedia listings for the alive and well hijackers is that they all read pretty much identical. They were all initially mistaken by the FBI for others who had passports stolen but now we are assured by the agents for America's criminal ruling-class that they were, in fact, the hijackers. But as the other poster mentioned, it is not at all necessary to prove the hijackers to be alive to show that 9/11 was an inside job. That those who embrace and promote the government's official 9/11 conspiracy theory offer that up as some kind of ultimate proof merely shows how lacking they are in real evidence to prove their case. David Ray Griffin - 9/11 The Myth and The Reality 1:38:42 - 1 year ago Great presentation by David Ray Griffin about 9/11. <a href="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6837001821567284154#docid=-4069714733894389451" rel="nofollow">http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6837001821567284154#docid=-4069714733894389451</a>]]>

<![CDATA[How you can extract yourself from further exposure of your baseless prattle. Your'e not very clever nor credible, the fact that you haven't given and accounting how you'd conduct yourself personally with regards to associating with the illegals you defend is a clear example of someone who is all talk but has no true conviction expressed by actions. An armchair self-righteous social commentator more than willing to attack those who won't agree with you but obviously a coward in real life. False bravado to your claimed personal wealth which you think will impress others (a childish display) but in fact makes you look petty. Insulting is what you're all about, in fact you've made a profession of it and by calling you Prof. Shitology is only stating a well documented fact. All in all you like too many Liberal minded people lack depth and true conviction and when this is exposed you're reduced to one or two sentences of meaningless insults that you think will distract from the emptiness you post. I expect more insults and meaningless statements because even when beaten you can't be honest with yourself, worried others will continue to notice the swallow nature of your personality and hoping somehow you can be redeemed in their eyes. You are destined to repeat your bad practices because you know no other way and haven't the courage to learn understanding of others. You are a child, an angry dissatisfied juvenile who when unable to convince others to think as you do, lashes out in anger and frustration. I'm sure your next post will confirm this, you are a servant to your emotions.]]>

<![CDATA[When will some people learn basic Net etiquette? All caps posts are considred extremely barbaric and uncouth! It doesn't matter the nature of your cause, courtesy is demanded. To those tasteless louts who insist on unsightly all caps posts, whatever your position, I will vote for the opposite. That is a solemn promise I make to you all caps posters, whatever your views or parties. Good manners count. Moreover, I vote in every election, even minor ones, so don't be counterproductive to whatever it may be that you preach. Thank you very much. ]]>

<![CDATA[Stand with Arizona in Phoenix this weekend! Dear Activists, Join NumbersUSAs Chad MacDonald at the National Immigration Policy Summit July 30-31 in Phoenix. Speakers include: Senator Russell Pearce, the sponsor of Arizonas enforcement law; former INS Special Agent Michael Cutler; constitutional scholar Prof. John Eastman; and best-selling author, blogger Michelle Malkin. Although this is not a NumbersUSA event, we are informing members who may be interested in attending. Tomorrow is the last day to register to attend the summit, which takes place Friday and Saturday (July 30-31). NumbersUSAs Chad MacDonald will be giving two presentations: 2010 Elections: How to use NumbersUSA Immigration-Reduction Grade Cards and Candidate Comparison Grids Grassroots and Online Activism : United Against Amnesty get more information. register for the policy summit. Regards, Jenny Magyari Local Power NumbersUSA NumbersUSA Local Power Team Local Power is the grassroots division of NumbersUSA that meet with Representatives and Senators at the local level. The Local Power Team connects, activates, and organizes members in their congressional districts. Local Power has three specific goals with the 111th Congress: 1. Stop Amnesty 2. Get E-Verify Nationwide 3. Promote Constituent Pressure Local Power is a multi-departmental marketing and communications effort using the entire spectrum of tools available from e-mail to phone calls, fax to Facebook, coffee to twitter, conference calls to handwritten letters, and many more. To inquire about your Local Power Team, e-mail Jenny Magyari (jenny@numbersusa.com)or Chad MacDonald (chad@numbersusa.com). Follow us on Twitter www.twitter.com/NumbersUSA and join us on Facebook: www.facebook.com/NumbersUSAforLowerImmigrationLevels Numbers USA 1601 N. Kent Street Suite 1100 Arlington, VA 22209 ]]>

<![CDATA[SAVE Act and CLEAR Act Can Overturn Judge Bolton's Decision on Arizona Immigration Enforcement Law By Chris Chmielenski, Wednesday, July 28, 2010, 4:03 PM EDT - posted on NumbersUSA Federal Judge Susan Bolton ordered an injunction today of Arizona’s immigration enforcement law, formerly known as SB1070, just hours before it’s scheduled to take effect. Supporters of immigration enforcement are angry and frustrated over the ruling, but there is hope in the halls of Congress – of all places. If Congress passed the SAVE Act and CLEAR Act, these two bills together would secure the border, mandate E-Verify nationwide, and provide local law enforcement officials with the tools to help federal officials enforce immigration laws obviating the need for SB1070. Let’s take a look at exactly what today’s ruling by Judge Bolton actually represents. It’s an injunction – or a temporary suspension – of several provisions within Arizona’s immigration enforcement law. It’s not the final decision. After hearing both sides of the case in a lengthy civil trial, Judge Bolton could decide that the federal government did not do a satisfactory job of proving their case, thereby causing her to lift her injunction. While that’s highly unlikely, it is possible. Judge Bolton’s decision did strike down SB1070’s most famous clause that requires local police officers to check an individual’s immigration status if they have ‘reasonable suspicion’ that the individual is in the country illegally. The decision did not suspend provisions that prohibit sanctuary cities, require state and local cooperation with federal officials, allow its residents to sue local leaders for refusing to cooperate with federal officials, prohibit the transport of illegal aliens, and restrict solicitation of illegal alien day laborers. Arizona’s mandatory E-Verify law that was passed several years ago is still intact, including its sanctions for businesses that knowingly hire illegal aliens. Plus, any communities that participate in the federal government’s 287(g) and Secure Communities programs can still do so, and SB1070 prevents local municipalities from outright refusing to cooperate with federal enforcement officials. In other words, despite Judge Bolton’s ruling today, SB1070 is still a step in the right direction for Arizona. Poll after poll shows consistent support from Americans who want an Arizona-style enforcement law passed in their own state. Today’s ruling has no impact on states that are proceeding with similar legislation. Arizona’s federal district court does not have jurisdiction over South Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, and Florida, so lawmakers in those states can cautiously proceed without concern. What now? Today’s ruling from Judge Bolton becomes moot if Congress passes the SAVE Act and the CLEAR Act. It’s unlikely for either bill to make its way to the House floor before the end of the 111th Congress in December. But both are expected to be reintroduced next year and could move forward with enough constituent pressure. Check your Members’ Immigration-Reduction Report Cards and see if they’ve cosponsored the SAVE Act and CLEAR Act. If they haven’t, call their office and urge them to do so. You can also look on our grid of “5 Great Immigration Reduction Bills” and see if they’ve cosponsored SAVE, CLEAR, and three other key bills. And finally, there are rumblings in the Senate that Majority Leader Harry Reid may try to bring the DREAM Act to the floor for a vote before they adjourn on August 9. We’ve posted new faxes on your Action Board to send to your Senators. With the fallout from Arizona, your elected officials will be much more sensitive to what their constituents are telling them. We know you’re frustrated with today’s ruling. But there’s not much anyone can do about a court issued injunction from a federally appointed judge, so direct your frustrations towards things you can control. Make immigration enforcement a top election issue this fall and urge your current Members of Congress to cosponsor the SAVE Act and CLEAR Act! CHRIS CHMIELENSKI is the Website Content Manager for NumbersUSA NumbersUSA's blogs are copyrighted and may be republished or reposted only if they are copied in their entirety, including this paragraph, and provide proper credit to NumbersUSA. NumbersUSA bears no responsibility for where our blogs may be republished or reposted. Views and opinions expressed in blogs on this website are those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect official policies of NumbersUSA. Subscribe to our Blog Feed Related Searches:Attrition through Enforcement Illegal Immigration Interior Enforcement SB1070 state policies cchmielenski's blog Email this page Printer-friendly version Comments NumbersUSA thanks you for your continued support and cooperation. Comment Guidelines ReportNew John7492 of FL: The 2nd mexican-american war has begun... FINALLY !!! ReplyPosted Fri 07/30 11:11am ReportNew Carolynn2495 of AZ: Obama is working more for the Illegal Immigrants than he is for the American people. That tells me he wants to destroy this country. Is that his real agenda? i think it is time to start cleaning house in the government in general. ReplyPosted Fri 07/30 4:34am ReportNew Heather5985 of NC: I hate to say this and mean it..but yes I believe that is his plan. One dictatorship is this man's agenda! ReplyPosted Fri 07/30 8:28am ReportNew William and Mary7863 of TX: An Arizona sherrif on Greta's "On the Record" cited the good points that remain intact in the bill. If he can feel like a winner, how can we do less? That's better than California. Keep plugging along Arizona, so other states can gain courage! Texas has the longest border with a smaller percentage of Patrol Agents. We're still hoping for better! ReplyPosted Fri 07/30 12:56am ReportNew Kathleen8230 of CA: Also, a big shame on you Judge Bolton. So sad to see what our Great Country is becoming! ReplyPosted Fri 07/30 12:45am ReportNew Kathleen8230 of CA: Arizona ROCKS! We need to get rid of the dead weight like? JUDGE BOLTON? Arizona is trying to do the right thing for the folks who live there, pity our President won't do the same for the Americans living in other States. Shame on you, Obama! ReplyPosted Fri 07/30 12:42am ReportNew Chris9352 of LA: These actions are questionable as to their legality under the constitution of the United States. U.S. citizenship is not a political trinket to be hand out, in order to, create, sustain, or expand the political power base of any one political party. ReplyPosted Thu 07/29 11:38pm ReportNew John2844 of AZ: I'm not an attorney. However, I can see definite errors in Judge Bolton's opinion. Put a FAX on the board so we can tell her exactly what we think of her legal prowess. ReplyPosted Thu 07/29 11:33pm ReportNew Gary9448 of OR: I'm sorry but disbarment is not an option. Impeachment is. So let's get her impeached as soon as possible. This decision will be appealed in the 9th circuit court which is notoriously liberal but has backed in favor of immigration restrictions. I think AZ will prevail. ReplyPosted Thu 07/29 10:43pm ReportNew Orlando6673 of CA: Start a movement of small business owners to commit to NOT hiring illegals and then state who they are so as to have members of NumbersUSA & other organizations with the same goal consume their product as a means of support for their commitment to do what is right. … Show More Start a movement of small business owners to commit to NOT hiring illegals and then state who they are so as to have members of NumbersUSA & other organizations with the same goal consume their product as a means of support for their commitment to do what is right. Let's start to do something outside of just pushing government to do what's right about immigration & let's do our part to promote self deportation buy removing the job incentive. Show LessReplyPosted Thu 07/29 9:48pm ReportNew Ronald L6079 of TX: A fax to this judge would be meaningful to me because I am so tired of this liberal mess in the country I was once proud of until 2008. ReplyPosted Thu 07/29 6:45pm ReportNew Mary6016 of VA: I wasn't proud with Bush in charge(illegal Iraq war and trampling over our rights in the name of Nat'l Security), but Obama brings in a whole other set of problems! How many National Security secrets will he take with him when he leaves office? As well as the set of problems a Democratic controlled Congress adds. … Show More I wasn't proud with Bush in charge(illegal Iraq war and trampling over our rights in the name of Nat'l Security), but Obama brings in a whole other set of problems! How many National Security secrets will he take with him when he leaves office? As well as the set of problems a Democratic controlled Congress adds. If GOP gains control and continues "business as usual", there will be a revolt and a third party will have a "real" chance at winning! Show LessReplyPosted Thu 07/29 6:50pm ReportNew Richard4966 of AZ: I think we're a bit wet behind the ears if we think either of the two acts are going to change anything. There's enough unenforced laws already, one more isn't going to help unless both houses of Congress are voted out of office. ReplyPosted Thu 07/29 6:23pm ReportNew Kathy3426 of TX: I agree with all who want to fax this judge. I am angrier than a hornet. ReplyPosted Thu 07/29 6:23pm ReportNew Al and Cheryl0473 of NV: What should we expect from a Clinton appointee? This judge should be disbarred! Put this on the Action buffet and let us all send Judge Bolton a fax! ReplyPosted Thu 07/29 4:45pm ReportNew Rachel0436 of GA: Amen!!! We need to clean house. ReplyPosted Thu 07/29 10:25pm ReportNew Larry1756 of CA: I too am a Veteran ... Thank-You for your service Edward5261 ... I wholeheartedly agree with you ... It will be a, " Cold Day In Hell " before I leave my own Country that I served to protect... Semper Fi. ReplyPosted Thu 07/29 4:29pm ReportNew Jacques7265 of WY: This is "legislation from the bench" and most outrageous! All the more reason to put time limits on judges. ReplyPosted Thu 07/29 4:24pm ReportNew Maryann3053 of CA: It's time for us to stand up for what we believe in. We should not allow other countries to move in and take over. Other countries will not allow others to move in. You must become a citizen of that country. They can visit, obey our laws and leave. Yes you can stay. Become a citizen. Pay taxes. Do not kill or bring drugs. We must have control! ReplyPosted Thu 07/29 4:17pm ReportNew Thomas 9404 of TX: You know, it's all about obtaining cheap labor- If the U.S.A doesn't want to enforce the Immigration Law already on the books- Then why enforce any law at all? Hells bells,just get rid of all the laws then- They can move in, and I will move out of the U.S.A- The over crowding, pressure on State Budgets, due to benefits afforded to Illegal Aliens- is terrible. ReplyPosted Thu 07/29 3:45pm ReportNew Dennis & Barb1990 of CO: I would like to know why we don't hear about the American loses from illegal immigration! There is always a sob story about an illegal on tv each night but they rarely report on the American's who lose their life to an illegal. Here in Denver a man just lost his life to an illegal who hit him with his car and then ran. The news reported it as an immigrant. … Show More I would like to know why we don't hear about the American loses from illegal immigration! There is always a sob story about an illegal on tv each night but they rarely report on the American's who lose their life to an illegal. Here in Denver a man just lost his life to an illegal who hit him with his car and then ran. The news reported it as an immigrant. So I do think every family who has lost a love one or have been harmed in ANY way should sue the local, state and federal government for not protecting their right to life liberity or the pursuit of happiness. Let's make them accountable! The only reason we have this problem is because our government has REFUSED to protect us! Show LessReplyPosted Thu 07/29 3:13pm ReportNew Mike8987 of IA: Thank the judge for her activist political opinion than reaffirm the Law in the legislature and include a provision to remove the jurisdiction of the courts to hear the case. … Show More Thank the judge for her activist political opinion than reaffirm the Law in the legislature and include a provision to remove the jurisdiction of the courts to hear the case. We have allowed this farce of judicial supremacy to continue far too long, read a report about how the Democrat party has a lock on the system that nominates judges for positions on the court <a href="http://www.nathanwtucker.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.nathanwtucker.com</a> courts do not make law and it's time we stopped the ludicrous practice of accepting their premise that they do. Our founding fathers are turning over in their graves to imagine that we would allow this because they certainly wouldn't have. Show Less ReplyPosted Thu 07/29 1:18pm ReportNew Jack4160 of OR: If they cannot check for warrants or other illegal activities on an illegal alien they sure as hell can't check for warrants or criminal activities of any actual citizens ReplyPosted Thu 07/29 12:58pm ReportNew Richard4966 of AZ: Oh wow, I hadn't thought of that. You're right! But then again, they're ignoring the existing laws, why would discrimination be something they'd enforce? ReplyPosted Thu 07/29 6:25pm ReportNew Rickey4936 of FL: The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Bills of 2007 in the House and the Senate each recognised that the States have the authority to enforce immigration laws. From the House of Representative's bill, H.R.1645, 110th Congress 1st Session, March 22, 2007: "‘‘SEC. 240D. … Show More The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Bills of 2007 in the House and the Senate each recognised that the States have the authority to enforce immigration laws. From the House of Representative's bill, H.R.1645, 110th Congress 1st Session, March 22, 2007: "‘‘SEC. 240D. LAW ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY OF STATES AND POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS AND TRANSFER OF ALIENS TO FEDERAL CUSTODY. ‘‘(a) AUTHORITY.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, law enforcement personnel of a State, or a political subdivision of a State, have the inherent authority of a sovereign entity to investigate, apprehend, arrest, detain, or transfer to Federal custody (including the transportation across State lines to detention centers) an alien for the purpose of assisting in the enforcement of the criminal provisions of the immigration laws of the United States in the normal course of carrying out the law enforcement duties of such personnel. This State authority has never been displaced or preempted by a Federal law." Exactly the same text, word for word and letter for letter, is found in the Senate bill, S.1348, 110th Congress 1st Session, May 9th, 2007, starting at about the middle of page 201 of the PDF file. The House passed their version but the Senate bill failed because of the massive public outcry (thanks NumbersUSA!) against the amnesty provision. The solution to our problem(s) is to get patriots whose allegiance is to our Constitution elected to both houses of the Congress, at least a majority and a supermajority if possible. Even if we get a supermajority in both houses in November it is unlikely the President will sign either the SAVE or the CLEAR acts. Remember in November - Vote Obama is a DIVIDER - DIVIDE AND CONQUER United we stand - divided we fall VOTE ALL INCUMBENTS OUT! ]]>

<![CDATA[<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waleed_al-Shehri" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waleed_al-Shehri</a> On September 23, 2001 BBC News reported that Waleed was "alive and well" in Casablanca, Morocco and was talking to multiple media organizations;[19][20] however, due to confusion over the man's identity, and editorial concerns over conspiracy theories, BBC News later modified the September 23 report by inserting "A man called ... "[19] BBC News considers the September 23 report superseded by an October 5, 2001 report that lists Waleed as one of the alleged hijackers believed by the FBI to be responsible for the September 11 attacks.[19][21] Waleed and Wail were both reported to have been initially found, in error, by a Saudi newspaper editor as the sons of Ahmed Alshehri, a senior Saudi diplomat stationed in Bombay, India.[citation needed] On September 16, 2001, the diplomat Ahmed Alshehri denied that he was the father of the two hijackers. Wail claims he did attend Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University in Daytona Beach, Florida — but was the victim of mistaken identity, since he used that training to secure his current position with a Moroccan airline company. Saudi Arabia has confirmed his story, and suggested he was the victim of identity theft. Muhammad Ali Al-Shihri, the hijacker al-Shehri brothers' true father, was identified prior to September 17, 2001, and told Arab News that he hadn't heard from his sons in ten months prior to September 2001.[22] An ABC News story in March 2002 repeated this, and during a report entitled "A Saudi Apology" for Dateline NBC on Aug 25 2002, NBC reporter John Hockenberry traveled to 'Asir, where he interviewed the third brother, Salah, who agreed that his two brothers were dead and claimed they had been "brainwashed". Furthermore another article explains that the pilot who lives in Casablanca was named Walid al-Shri (not Waleed M. al-Shehri) and that much of the BBC information regarding "alive" hijackers was incorrect according to the same sources used by BBC. In September 2007, a video recording of his last testament was released to mark the 6th anniversary of the attacks. Here is a link to this asshole mass murder's "martyrdom video" <a href="http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=video&cd=1&ved=0CDIQtwIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fvideo.google.com%2Fvideoplay%3Fdocid%3D5810097534812155210&ei=gQJTTO2-N4z4sAPioLXOBQ&usg=AFQjCNGUnRuw0rxFb9PueRsyQHc8esZMAQ" rel="nofollow">http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=video&cd=1&ved=0CDIQtwIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fvideo.google.com%2Fvideoplay%3Fdocid%3D5810097534812155210&ei=gQJTTO2-N4z4sAPioLXOBQ&usg=AFQjCNGUnRuw0rxFb9PueRsyQHc8esZMAQ</a> <h1>FUCK YOU LYING "TRUTHER"</h1>]]>

<![CDATA[IT GETS MUCH WORSE! NEW OBAMA OFFICIALS' MEMOS SHOW PLAN TO AMNESTY MILLIONS WITHOUT ANY VOTE IN CONGRESS The U.S. Senators who have been demanding answers from the Administration about a rumored administrative amnesty have now revealed shocking memos from top Obama officials. They show Obama Administration officials offering a detailed plan that would offer actual or de facto amnesty to millions of illegal aliens without Congress ever taking a vote. In this way, the Administration would be able to reap the thanks of all the cheap-labor, outlaw industries relying on illegal labor, as well as the entire pro-illegal voter base. But no Member of Congress would have a vote for amnesty on his/her record while facing elections. A day after a federal judge ruled that the people of Arizona can't enforce immigration laws against illegal aliens, this memo shows a grand plan for the Obama Administration to ensure that most illegal aliens get work permits, keep their jobs and prevent unemployed Americans from getting the jobs instead. THIS IS A NEWS FLASH. WE WILL HAVE MORE TO SAY LATER. Read our news story on our Home page. Go to your Action Buffet and start looking for faxes and phone notes to respond to this outrageous backdoor amnesty plan. Keep coming back through the evening and Friday as we put up new actions. We must respond with the kind of outrage that will make the Obama Administration back away from this plan for incredible abuse of executive power. THANKS, -- ROY numbersUSA This may be a good time for you to make sure that you've let us know all of the areas you are interested in. In order to further customize the type of alerts you receive click here <a href="http://www.numbersusa.com/survey?action=longlist" rel="nofollow">http://www.numbersusa.com/survey?action=longlist</a> comment - - AMERICA BEWARE - DIVIDE AND CONQUER REMEMBER NOVEMBER Vote all incumbents out! Lets take OUR country back! ]]>

<![CDATA[Well......dumbass.....in your own words......."ad hominem attacks are the last resort (ineffective at best) of a man sinking in his own shit! " Thanks for surrendering though. Jesus there are dumbasses here!!!! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 2010-07-30, 9:00AM PDT Reply to: comm-hucyw-1871582742@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I actually hope this is your last word on the topic but I doubt it because Shitologists like you always find new crap to deposit here. ]]>

<![CDATA[I actually hope this is your last word on the topic but I doubt it because Shitologists like you always find new crap to deposit here. Date: 2010-07-30, 8:34AM PDT Reply to: comm-qzqtt-1871524337@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?] One word........dumbass........irony! Jesus there are dumbasses here!!!!! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 2010-07-30, 7:00AM PDT Reply to: comm-vssy9-1871341292@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- LOL, well Prof. Shitology I'm surprise an educated guy like you hasn't learned your lesson which is ad hominem attacks are the last resort (ineffective at best) of a man sinking in his own shit! ]]>

<![CDATA[how do you do it accurately? If you drop an object out of the spaceship, it will bounce, spoiling perfect placement. A parachute won't work because there's no atmosphere. Also, scooping up moon rocks while in orbit is tricky. You can't slow down a craft to five miles an hour while it's in flight as though it were a land vehicle. Let's face it, men landed and they scooped up moon rocks and placed reflectors! You can't be arguing they didn't have computers but they could accomplish these difficult tasks without contradicting yourself. The same thing is true of the cameras. Nowadays we have computer technology so maybe we can compensate for extremes of lighting in the same field of view, but in those days all they had were cameras with one iris. They couldn't sit there for hours like Ansel Adams and compose perfectly balanced pictures. Do you comprehend this, Emma?]]>

<![CDATA[One word........dumbass........irony! Jesus there are dumbasses here!!!!! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 2010-07-30, 7:00AM PDT Reply to: comm-vssy9-1871341292@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- LOL, well Prof. Shitology I'm surprise an educated guy like you hasn't learned your lesson which is ad hominem attacks are the last resort (ineffective at best) of a man sinking in his own shit! ]]>

<![CDATA[What are 308,367,109 Americans supposed to do? First of all, despite clamping down on immigration, our population grew by 2.6M people last year. Unfortunately, not only did we not create jobs for those 2.6M new people but we lost about 4M jobs so what are these new people going to do? Not only that, but nobody is talking about the another major job issue: People aren’t retiring! They can’t afford to because the economy is bad - that means there are even less job openings… The pimply-faced kid can’t get a job delivering pizza because his grandpa’s doing it. There are some brilliant pundits who believe cutting retirement benefits will fix our economy. How will that work exactly? Pay old people less money, don’t cover their medical care and what happens? Then they need money. If they need money, they need to work and if they need to work they increase the supply of labor, which reduces wages and leaves all 308,367,109 of us with less money. What are 308,367,109 Americans supposed to do? First of all, despite clamping down on immigration, our population grew by 2.6M people last year. Unfortunately, not only did we not create jobs for those 2.6M new people but we lost about 4M jobs so what are these new people going to do? Not only that, but nobody is talking about the another major job issue: People aren’t retiring! They can’t afford to because the economy is bad - that means there are even less job openings… The pimply-faced kid can’t get a job delivering pizza because his grandpa’s doing it. There are some brilliant pundits who believe cutting retirement benefits will fix our economy. How will that work exactly? Pay old people less money, don’t cover their medical care and what happens? Then they need money. If they need money, they need to work and if they need to work they increase the supply of labor, which reduces wages and leaves all 308,367,109 of us with less money. Oh sorry, not ALL 308,367,109 - just 308,337,109 - the top 30,000 (0.01%) own the business the other 308,337,109 work at and they will be raking it in because labor is roughly 1/3 of the cost of doing business in America and our great and powerful capitalists have already cut their manufacturing costs by shipping all those jobs overseas, where they pay as little as $1 a day for a human life so now, in order to increase their profits (because profits MUST be increased) they have now turned inward to see what they can shave off in America. How does one decrease the cost of labor in America? Well first, you have to bust the unions. Check. Then you have to create a pressing need for people to work - perhaps give them easy access to credit and then get them to go so deeply into debt that they will have to work until they die to pay them off. Check. It also helps if you push up the cost of living by manipulating commodity prices. Check. Then, take away people’s retirement savings. Check. Lower interest rates to make savings futile and interest income inadequate. Check. And finally, threaten to take away the 12% a year that people have been saving for retirement by labeling Social Security an "entitlement" program - as if it wasn’t money Americans worked their whole lives to save and gave to the government in good faith. Check. As Allen Smith says: "Ronald Reagan and Alan Greenspan pulled off one of the greatest frauds ever perpetrated against the American people in the history of this great nation, and the underlying scam is still alive and well, more than a quarter century later. It represents the very foundation upon which the economic malpractice that led the nation to the great economic collapse of 2008 was built. Essentially, Reagan switched the federal government from what he critically called, a “tax and spend” policy, to a “borrow and spend” policy, where the government continued its heavy spending, but used borrowed money instead of tax revenue to pay the bills. The results were catastrophic. Although it had taken the United States more than 200 years to accumulate the first $1 trillion of national debt, it took only five years under Reagan to add the second one trillion dollars to the debt. By the end of the 12 years of the Reagan-Bush administrations, the national debt had quadrupled to $4 trillion!" Both Reagan and Greenspan saw big government as an evil, and they saw big business as a virtue. They both had despised the progressive policies of Roosevelt, Kennedy and Johnson, and they wanted to turn back the pages of time. They came up with the perfect strategy for the redistribution of income and wealth from the working class to the rich. If Reagan had campaigned for the presidency by promising big tax cuts for the rich and pledging to make up for the lost revenue by imposing substantial tax increases on the working class, he would probably not have been elected. But that is exactly what Reagan did, with the help of Alan Greenspan. Consider the following sequence of events: 1) President Reagan appointed Greenspan as chairman of the 1982 National Commission on Social Security Reform (aka The Greenspan Commission) 2) The Greenspan Commission recommended a major payroll tax hike to generate Social Security surpluses for the next 30 years, in order to build up a large reserve in the trust fund that could be drawn down during the years after Social Security began running deficits. 3) The 1983 Social Security amendments enacted hefty increases in the payroll tax in order to generate large future surpluses. 4) As soon as the first surpluses began to role in, in 1985, the money was put into the general revenue fund and spent on other government programs. None of the surplus was saved or invested in anything. The surplus Social Security revenue, that was paid by working Americans, was used to replace the lost revenue from Reagan’s big income tax cuts that went primarily to the rich. 5) In 1987, President Reagan nominated Greenspan as the successor to Paul Volker as chairman of the Federal Reserve Board. Greenspan continued as Fed Chairman until January 31, 2006. (One can only speculate on whether the coveted Fed Chairmanship represented, at least in part, a payback for Greenspan’s role in initiating the Social Security surplus revenue.) 6) In 1990, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan of New York, a member of the Greenspan Commission, and one of the strongest advocates the the 1983 legislation, became outraged when he learned that first Reagan, and then President George H.W. Bush used the surplus Social Security revenue to pay for other government programs instead of saving and investing it for the baby boomers. Moynihan locked horns with President Bush and proposed repealing the 1983 payroll tax hike. Moynihan’s view was that if the government could not keep its hands out of the Social Security cookie jar, the cookie jar should be emptied, so there would be no surplus Social Security revenue for the government to loot. President Bush would have no part of repealing the payroll tax hike. The “read-my-lips-no-new-taxes” president was not about to give up his huge slush fund. The practice of using every dollar of the surplus Social Security revenue for general government spending continues to this day. The 1983 payroll tax hike has generated approximately $2.5 trillion in surplus Social Security revenue which is supposed to be in the trust fund for use in paying for the retirement benefits of the baby boomers. But the trust fund is empty! It contains no real assets. As a result, the government will soon be unable to pay full benefits without a tax increase. Money can be spent or it can be saved. But you can’t do both. Absolutely none of the $2.5 trillion was saved or invested in anything. That is how the largest theft in the history of the world was carried out. 300M people worked and saved their whole lives to set aside $2.5Tn into a retirement system that, if it were paying a fair compounding rate of 5% interest over 40 years of labor (assuming an even $62Bn a year was contributed), would be worth $8.4Tn today - enough money to give 100M workers $84,000 each in cash! The looting of FICA hid the massive deficits of the last 30 years in the Unified Budget. Presidents and Congresses were able to reduce taxes on the wealthiest Americans without complaint from the deficit hawks, because they benefited. The money went directly from the pockets of average Americans into the pockets of the rich. Now that it is time to repay those special bonds in the Trust Fund, we are inundated in opinion pieces in the leading newspapers and magazines complaining about Social Security and its horrible impact on the budget. Government finances have been trashed by foolish tax cuts, unpaid wars, tax loopholes for corporations and the very wealthy, the failures of economists, the greedy search for greater returns in financial markets and the collapse of moral values in giant businesses but Social Security is supposed to be the problem that needs fixing… Social Security is not "broken" the money is in the Trust Fund. But the people who manage the finances of the United States don’t want to repay the bonds held by the Trust Fund. They want to default selectively against average people, their fellow citizens, who paid their taxes expecting to be protected in their retirement. Refusing to repay the $2.54 trillion dollars in bonds held by the Social Security Trust makes the US look like Greece, just another nation unable to govern itself coherently. The people who manage US finances come from the financial elites, the best that Wall Street and enormous corporations have to offer. Selective default exposes them as charlatans. The claims of the economics profession to expertise are puffery. Their theories about the benefits of tax cuts are proven false. Their mathematical proofs about free markets collapse in the real world. So, what is this all about? It’s about forcing 5M people a year who reach the age 65 to remain in the work-force. The top 0.01% have already taken your money, they have already put you in debt, they have already bankrupted the government as well so it has no choice but to do their bidding. Now the top 0.01% want to make even MORE profits by paying American workers even LESS money. If they raise the retirement age to 70 to "balance" Social Security - that will guarantee that another 25M people remain in the workforce (less the ones that drop dead on the job - saving the bother of paying them severance). What’s next? Is it fair to say that children can’t work in a struggling family business? Isn’t it to everybody’s benefit that kids should be allowed to help out at the family store? That will be the next step towards turning America into a 3rd World country. The seemingly innocent concept of "letting" kids work will deprive another 5M people of paying jobs - throwing them out into the labor force as well and driving labor costs down even further. There’s an expression that goes "give them an inch and they’ll take a yard." The top 0.01% of this country have taken their inches and they are foreclosing on the yards and they will come for the rest of your stuff next. If you think you are "safe" from the looting of America, it is only because they haven’t gotten around to you yet. As I explained in "America is 234 Years Old Today - Is It Finished?" - the game is rigged very much like a poker tournament. The people at the top table don’t care how well you do wiping out your fellow players at the lower tables, they know they will get you eventually and your efforts to scoop up a pile of cash for yourself simply makes their job easier when they are ready to take it from you. The average American is $634,000 in debt thanks to the efforts that Reagan and Greenspan put in motion 30 years ago and the richer you are, the more of that money is going to come out of your hide eventually and the more you lobby to make sure that the "rich" are not taxed unfairly, the less fair it will be to you because, no matter how rich you THINK you are, unless your income is measured in MILLIONS PER MONTH, you aren’t even close to the top 30,000. No progressive tax? That means that people and corporations who make $1M PER DAY should pay no more tax than a person making $1M per year, right? Well that means that the $2.5M debt that your family of four owes will be paid by you over 2.5 years of labor while the $2.5M owed by your Billionaire competitor will be paid over a long weekend, after which he can turn his attention back to crushing your business by creating cheaper goods - maintaining profit margins by driving down local labor costs and outsourcing the rest. It’s a new world, America, and you’d better get used to it - we were sold down the river on a slow boat to China long ago and we’re only just beginning to feel the first effects of waves that wash back to our own shores. The people who own the media don’t want CHANGE. That’s why you never hear this stuff in the MSM - things are going exactly according to plan and the old money crowd is playing a long, patient game and they already have most of the chips - the last thing they want is people questioning the system… <a href="http://www.philstockworld.com/2010/07/17/its-the-end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it/" rel="nofollow">http://www.philstockworld.com/2010/07/17/its-the-end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it/</a> <center></center> ]]>

<![CDATA[In recent months, there have been an increasing number of news stories that reflect the growingly abusive application of anti-recording and anti-photography laws in the United States as the nation slides towards totalitarianism. These laws are frequently being used to protect liars, abusers, and criminals and are seldom applied to protect actual victims. While the recordings are sometimes of civilians like Mel Gibson verbally abusing his ex-girlfriend, other times they are government officials carrying badges and guns who are abusing their power, violating civil rights, or simply showing their true colors they don’t want the world to see. Lying and Abuse In Family Conflicts While it is clear Mel Gibson (or somebody who sounds much like him) was verbally abusive and vulgar in the recording, we don’t know what Oksana Grigorieva was up to for sure. Some suggest that as she knew the recording was being made, she may have controlled her own language better than usual and put in comments she knew would upset Gibson to make him furious. Clearly in the recording above, she changes from being relatively quiet at the beginning towards being far more loud and aggressive towards the end. Of course given Gibson’s words and tone, that doesn’t seem surprising. The point is that recordings can be manipulated, but if you know the whole thing is a recording then those listening to or viewing it can consider that in the overall context of other information. As the public knows, Gibson has had angry outbursts at other times and there is plenty of other information to consider. Many who have gone through divorces and child custody battles have experienced the false accusations, fabrications, and distortions common to bitter ex-spouses. If you dare risk a phone call to your kids, you can end up being accused of harassment or making death threats by a lying ex-spouse. Without a recording to prove what you said, too often the police will arrest the falsely accused on nothing more than allegations without evidence. Some prosecutor out to make a name as a “protector of women and children” may believe the liar and proceed to prosecute. If you could make recordings of phone calls in which you are a participant, you could protect yourself from such false accusations. But if you make such a recording today, you are risking being prosecuted under wiretap laws. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. Others who truly are being abused may try to prove the abuse by making recordings only to find they are inadmissible. They may even be prosecuted for trying to protect themselves against a real abuser or criminal merely because they were collecting evidence which is exactly what making a recording is. Police Abuse Recordings If you are some poor bloke who happens to be walking down the street and doing nothing wrong and is beaten, tasered, or shot by an abusive cop, the videos that bystanders may have taken of the police abuse can be seized. The parties making the recordings can be arrested for having photographed, recorded, or videotaped the cops. Welcome to the new fascist nation of the United States of America. There are estimates of 20% of the population suffering from personality disorders and many of these people are pathological liars. False accusations of serious crimes are the norm in many divorces. Cops in this day and age continue to abuse both innocent people and those not so innocent. Recordings are essential resources to help protect the innocent while aiding in prosecution of criminals for the crimes they truly did commit. For all of these reasons and more, recordings should be encouraged, not prosecuted. For example, motorcyclist Anthony Graber wore a helmet camera and recorded himself going 127 mph and doing wheelies in Harper County, Maryland. This dangerous driving got the attention of a Maryland plainclothes cop in an unmarked car who pulled in front of Graber and drew a gun on him without showing any ID but claiming verbally, with no evident proof, that he was a cop. The video shows how it appears this cop, claimed to be Joseph David Uhler, failed to identify himself in a reasonable fashion and threatened to use deadly force despite the motorcycle having already slowed to a stop. Graber got a traffic ticket. He deserved it and admits that. The video shows exactly what he was doing, making it clear he was speeding and driving dangerously. Perhaps Uhler’s actions can be understood given the high speed and how a marked police cruiser pulled up behind Graber around the time Uhler pulled in front and got out with his gun. Graber later posted the helmet camera video to YouTube, thinking it was no big deal. The helmet camera had been clearly visible and nothing was mentioned about it. Then police proceeded to obtain a search warrant, raid his home and take his computers and camera, and charge him with felony anti-recording crimes that could land him in prison for between 5 and 16 years. How is this reasonable? It’s not by any means. A news video from the local ABC affiliate shows excerpts from the video with the cop’s face blurred to “protect” him and an interview with Graber. Maryland cops are getting quite a reputation for being abusive with the growing number of recordings of their misconduct. The video below shows cops beating a college student without provocation. Without recordings like this one, cops get away with beating and even killing people without provocation. Recordings are a necessary defense against government abuse which is exactly why the criminals who run American governments are so intent on punishing people who make such recordings. Especially surprising is that even home security cameras located in one’s own home are triggering abusive arrests and prosecution. Cops become upset by the misconduct such cameras have recorded and want to punish and silence those who made the recordings. (from Six Legal Ways for Cops to Abuse You) Even if you have installed home security cameras and are robbed, you are not safe from these anti-recording laws. In Nashua, New Hampshire, cops showed up to respond to robbery call and treated the victims poorly, something their home security camera caught. When they complained to police about the misconduct and showed them the videos as proof, the cops decided to press wiretapping charges for illegally recording them. They seized the recordings to suppress public awareness of their abusive nature. (from No police scrutiny: Drop the camera and back away) In Nashua in 2006, police charged Michael Gannon with wiretapping after he brought surveillance video from his home security cameras to the police station to show police brass how poorly he said officers treated his son while they investigated a robbery charge. The wiretapping charge was later dropped, but police kept the evidence — the security video recordings. Laws Should Focus on Misuse of Recordings, Not Making Recordings Citizens are not safe in the United States without being able to prove what was said and what happened. These recordings should be legal and communicating them should be protected by free speech laws. The potential for abuse, such as breaking into an electronic communications session to record it or using recordings for extortion and blackmail, can be dealt with via other laws that already exist. Yet American governments are against this and wish to punish people who make recordings that embarrass them. Dishonest US President Bill Clinton, a Democrat, was embarrassed by Linda Tripp’s audio recordings of phone calls with Monica Lewinsky, the intern who engaged in sexual relations with Clinton. Tripp was charged with a crime for political reasons due to demands by Democrats who wanted to punish her for revealing Clinton’s immoral conduct. (from Wikipedia: Linda Tripp) Tripp was a resident of Columbia, Maryland at the time she made her surreptitious recordings of the conversations with Lewinsky, and 49 Democrats in the Maryland Legislature signed a letter to the state prosecutor demanding that Tripp be prosecuted under Maryland’s wiretap law. But government wants to suppress recordings for more than just avoiding embarrasment for immoral and illegal activities. They also want to “protect” the government from being held liable for violating people’s rights. That’s the reason for the recent spike in the police abuse of anti-recording laws being used to cover up police misconduct. No abusive cop wants to actually pay for his or her crimes. With today’s laws, they can make the victim into a criminal. That’s not just wrong, it makes our entire society a less safe place. When criminals in government make the laws, America becomes a nation by the criminals, for the criminals. These criminals have no use for citizens then can’t control, subjugate, tax, and otherwise victimize. Recordings can help the citizens rid the government of criminals and that’s exactly why government thinks these recordings are so threatening. Some raise the question of recordings being tampered with to create false impressions. That’s quite valid. But the answer is not to make recording illegal but rather to encourage all parties in a conflict to make recordings. Further, technology could be used to make tampering with recordings more difficult by embedding running encryption codes that could be used to help authenticate that digital recordings were probably not altered. Those who claimed recordings were authentic who are caught having altered them could be prosecuted for perjury, falsification of evidence, or wrongful police reports or sued for civil defamation. Finally, if you truly don’t want somebody to record what you are saying, then don’t say it or make an explicit anti-recording agreement that can be litigated in civil court if there is a violation. It’s little different than the many types of nondisclosure agreements routinely used in industry. You don’t see corporations demanding that there be criminal penalties for violating nondisclosure agreements, do you? No, they know this can be easily handled by no longer trusting a party who violated such an agreement and in civil courts when necessary. The same could be done with agreements to not record a conversation. It is time that laws in the United States be updated to reflect the new reality. It should be legal to record anything that you can see or hear in your home, workplace, in or from a public location, or via a telecommunications device in a conversation in which you are a participant without requiring all parties agree to the recording. This should apply to both audio and video recordings, combinations thereof, of for photography as well. In short, if you can see it or hear it because you’re there or are a participant, you should have a right to make a record of it unless you have made a voluntary agreement otherwise. <a href="http://angiemedia.com/2010/07/23/laws-against-audio-and-video-recording-protect-liars-abusers-and-government-criminals/" rel="nofollow">http://angiemedia.com/2010/07/23/laws-against-audio-and-video-recording-protect-liars-abusers-and-government-criminals/</a> <center></center> ]]>

<![CDATA[LOL, well Prof. Shitology I'm surprise an educated guy like you hasn't learned your lesson which is ad hominem attacks are the last resort (ineffective at best) of a man sinking in his own shit! Why deal with the fact that you wouldn't consider living around the very people (illegal immigrants) you proudly and angrily defend. Why do you hide from the fact that the vast majority of Americans favor Arizona's "illegals" law and that by definition of majority, include those other than "old white people gung-ho". Of course you tip your hand showing a bias by attacking white senior citizens., very interesting! Do you think you won't be old one day? If you think you can mischaracterize Arizona's law which only affirms Federal law and how it is to be carried out you're mistaken. All of us who've paid attention know Arizona is not making new law but trying to enforce Federal law Obama is unwilling to carry out which is his duty as President. So you clearly display your Shitology when trying to associate it with "Jim Crow or the Confederacy". Your tactics are cheap, simplistic and hateful that don't and won't work because they are so transparently false. I'm laughing at you because with your last gasping breath to defend your indefensible positions you find it necessary to go off topic bashing Bush or the top 2% of wage earners with hopes of gaining support, but there is no support because it has nothing to do with Arizona's law. Imagine, Prof. Shitology having his argument so easily disposed of! Date: 2010-07-29, 11:01PM PDT Reply to: comm-pxyfh-1871063523@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?] yes everyone agrees being an idiot and having old white people gung-ho about violating minoritys civil rights and violating the U.S. Constitution is fashionable and trendy for Fascists! They want racist "State Rights" to supersede the US Constitution and Federal law and go "Juan Crow" on Americans! The effin Confederacy wing-nuts! They also want the cheap labor and don't want to go after the American Employers! Having your cake and eating it priceless! Nothing like saying 30 billion in loans to small businesses to hire and pay back like bush's tarp No! Yes to 4.4 trillion in deficit expansion for the top 2% Now that's some shitology! second amendment remedies seems like a good idea! ]]>

<![CDATA[Whether the supposed hijackers are dead or alive doesn't prove anything. Never the less . . . Hijack 'suspects' alive and well <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1559151.stm" rel="nofollow">http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1559151.stm</a>]]>

<![CDATA[Does that mean that if you check into Illinois Masonic Hospital, you put yourself in the hands of monsters?]]>

<![CDATA[If you voted for Obama in part because of his promise to end the war and bring the troops home, then EAT SHIT!]]>

<![CDATA[That would give her a chance to actually do something instead of just kvetching all the time. As it is, she's like some guy who tells us a huge meteorite is going to strike the earth next month, wiping out all humans, and the reason he's telling us this is: "There isn't a thing you can do about it, but at least you can kiss your asses goodbye."]]>

<![CDATA[that doesn't prove he couldn't have some good things to say in his songs. Nobody is 100% good or evil. We're all a mixture of both.]]>

<![CDATA[So it should be easy to prove they didn't crash. All you have to do is prove that they're alive. Produce the actual men. Duh!]]>

<![CDATA[Good. That's what you get! Next time he''ll think twice before greedily gobbling up the rest of the lunch.]]>

<![CDATA[yes everyone agrees being an idiot and having old white people gung-ho about violating minoritys civil rights and violating the U.S. Constitution is fashionable and trendy for Fascists! They want racist "State Rights" to supersede the US Constitution and Federal law and go "Juan Crow" on Americans! The effin Confederacy wing-nuts! They also want the cheap labor and don't want to go after the American Employers! Having your cake and eating it priceless! Nothing like saying 30 billion in loans to small businesses to hire and pay back like bush's tarp No! Yes to 4.4 trillion in deficit expansion for the top 2% Now that's some shitology! second amendment remedies seems like a good idea!]]>

<![CDATA[Starting with George Washington, every US president has been recruited and selected by British 'intelligence' long before they became a candidate of choice of either party. The US never was nor ever will be anything but a facet of British Imperialism. All domestic secret services are administered by people who have taken oaths of loyalty to the British Crown. These men are agents of British Imperialism and traitors to their 'country'. They never did work (or intended to work) for Joe or Jane (American) Public. So, which British spy would you like to decide your future and that of your children... and which British Empire war would you like to support? and maybe send your children to fight? Check this out! Following copied from: <a href="http://www.allinharmony.com/index.cfm?id=719025&fuseaction=browse&pageid=157" rel="nofollow">http://www.allinharmony.com/index.cfm?id=719025&fuseaction=browse&pageid=157</a> If you lived in a military police state administered by a mostly foreign and hidden elite with an undisclosed agenda... what sort of person would you imagine might be chosen to 'father' that 'country'? George Washington ... was a British spy who conspired with the French principally to deceive native Americans (in a sophisticated 'good cop' 'bad cop' set-up). He would later be entrusted with leading a 'revolution' to establish an 'independent' administrative center secretly directed by traditional European imperialist interests (including Masonic), of which he was a member. And, like his great grandfather, he was called 'destroyer of villages' by the Indians he helped to genocide. Sandy wrote: (comment below excerpted from: <a href="http://burningtaper.blogspot.com/2006/08/masonic-genocide.html" rel="nofollow">http://burningtaper.blogspot.com/2006/08/masonic-genocide.html</a>) Masonic Genocide? The other day, out of curiosity, I googled around to find what historical Masonic leaders had to say about Native Americans. Or as one church site said: “A historical report was then given of the continual breaking of treaties and promises as an operational mode of the establishment of the United States by the non-first nations cultures that immigrated to this land. The systematic genocide of the Native People's under Masonic expansionist manifest destiny, a philosophy derived from the Crusades mentality, was openly exposed.” Here is what some of the Masonic leaders had to say about us: George Washington, Fredericksburg Lodge No. 4, Fredericksburg, Virginia; Alexandria-Washington Lodge No. 22 Indians were defined as subhumans, lower than animals. George Washington compared them to wolves, “beasts of prey” and called for their total destruction. George Washington's troops skinned Native Americans like animals. Apparently his first agenda item as President was the exermination of the Native Americans. ]]>

<![CDATA[I'm saying that you're infamous for dishing out advise and judgements but when it comes down to it, when conviction meets reality you are nowhere to be found. The very people you so arduously pretend to defend - you wouldn't live among them nor would they want you to! That's why you avoid the issue, trying to get back on your feet with portions of Arizona law being struck down. I got you nervous, sweating in fact because you've been outed for the phony rights activ-ass you really are. LOL Really just go join your buddies John Kerry and Charlie Rangel, two shitologist like you! Date: 2010-07-29, 7:44PM PDT Reply to: comm-9pbnw-1870902476@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?] So.......dumbass.....are you saying that if I move to AZ an unconstitutional law will magically become constitutional???????? And what the fuck is a thin vail? Jesus there are dumbasses here. Date: 2010-07-29, 9:12AM PDT Reply to: comm-axuwk-1869753295@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Now now Prof. Shitology all your baiting questions and accusations are a mere thin vail that doesn't really cover the fact that you are all talk and haven't the least bit of conviction to what you preach. We'll make it easier for you since even a wealthy person like yourself shouldn't have to buy property to prove a point, how about renting for a month or two an apartment were illegals in Arizona live, those you so steadfast defend as harmless and honest and then make posts detailing your experiences. That would be something, not just acting like a self-indulgent know it all as so many here are. If you haven't the balls to live up to your convictions nobody will take you seriously. The good people of Arizona on the other hand live next to and around the illegals and after years of suffering because of the way illegals bleed the system of funds they aren't entitled to and the massive crime they create, decided to enforce the Federal laws which you so vehemently protest against. You're like John Kerry and Charlie Rangel making speeches about the rich should pay their fair of taxes and then being caught themselves not paying and avoiding their own taxes! ]]>

<![CDATA[A 27-year-old Chatham woman is charged after allegedly punching her boyfriend in the face after he ate her sandwich. Chatham-Kent police said officers responded to a domestic dispute on Queen Street Monday evening. A man made his girlfriend a sandwich and she ate half. The man asked if he could finish the sandwich and she agreed, police said. A short time later, the woman got mad that the sandwich was missing and allegedly punched the man in the face. Later that night, police said the two got into an unrelated argument and she allegedly punched him in the chest. She faces two charges of assault. She was held for a bail hearing. <a href="http://www.chathamdailynews.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=2686908" rel="nofollow">http://www.chathamdailynews.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=2686908</a> <center></center> ]]>

<![CDATA[Move to TX, get shot by a woman, die. ]]>

<![CDATA[Here it is 2010. It's been over 20 years since the McMartin Preschool, Fells Acres and other scandals sent innocent people to prison for sexual abuse of children that never took place. The primary weapon used against them was the manner in which children were induced to make up fictional abuse and then testify to it in court. Essentially, adults questioning the children were so imbued with the righteousness of their cause that they ignored the children's persistent answers that no abuse had occurred. Through relentless suggestive and leading questioning, the adults got the answers they wanted. And what they wanted was nothing less than the most lurid, salacious accounts imaginable. Small children tied to trees and sexually mutilated by adults wielding large carving knives was a favorite of the Fells Acres mob. Sexual perverts? You'd better believe it. But they weren't the children's teachers; they were their inquisitors. By the early 1990s, social science and law enforcement had combined to produce protocols for the proper questioning of children in cases of alleged physical or sexual abuse. One of the signal features of Tonya Craft's recent case is that those protocols weren't used. That failure was a key element of Craft's successful defense. It likely will also be a key element of her civil suit against her accusers. The fact that the protocols for questioning children are so well established, makes this case out of Scotland all the more outrageous (The Scotsman, 7/16/10). To put it in a nutshell, a father was attempting to gain some form of custody of his two children. To combat his claim, his ex-partner's attorney, advised her of "dirty tricks" that she might use to secure residence with the children and cut off contact with the father completely. And that's just what the mother did. She reported to the court that the father had sexually abused their five-year-old daughter. An "investigation" ensued in which the child's questioners did exactly what you're not supposed to do when questioning a child. The court found there was a catalogue of inappropriate direct questioning, including leading and closed questions. According to the judgment, the interviews broke almost all the rules set out in the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Protocol which is regarded as the gold standard of interviewing children. Here's how that "investigation" is now being characterized by the sheriff who's been investigating the "investigators:" He described the second interview as "one of the worst I have seen". He continued: "Dr R (a child psychologist] considered the interviewing of (the girl] to be worse than the interviewing of children that led to the Orkney inquiry because here it was so deliberate. It alarmed them that all these years later there was direct questioning of the child because she was not saying what the interviewers wanted to hear. (The witness] was concerned at the driven nature of the interviews in drawing things out of the child and putting things in the child's mind." The Orkney case happened in 1991 and, like our own McMartin Preschool and other cases, it spurred Scottish authorities to establish their own protocol for questioning children. It's one of the signal features of this case that, nineteen years later, those protocols were forthrightly ignored. And, as with all such cases, it's not just the father who's the victim of the zealots, it's the little girl too. Here was a five-year-old who was coerced into saying the most outrageous and false things about her father whom she presumably loves. What did that do to her psyche? And, having finally knuckled under to her inquisitor's demands, she was then subjected to a pelvic exam by a stranger. Nice. A full investigation, including joint interviews with police and social workers, led to an intimate examination of the girl, a move the child psychologist said was "unjustified"; had been a "significant event" for a girl of that age; and one she was uncomfortable with. Who were the sexual abusers here? It begins to look like the lawyer, the mother, the police and the social worker. The father, after all, was completely exonerated. But there's more - much more. According to the sheriff investigating the matter and many other experts, the problem is not just in this one, isolated case; it's system-wide. In a devastating court judgment - which experts said highlighted "serious systemic problems" of malpractice throughout the child protection service - their conduct was described as worse than in the interviewing of children that led to the Orkney child abuse inquiry in 1991. The country's leading expert on the forensic interviewing of children said the case exposed a problem at the heart of child protection that was harming youngsters' welfare... In an article published in the Scots Law Times today, Dr David La Rooy of Abertay University and advocate John Halley said they wished to "highlight a serious systemic problem which is harming the welfare of children". They wrote: "The failures in this case are not dissimilar to the kinds of malpractice [we]regularly encounter in our respective practices in other cases of joint investigative interviewing of children in Scotland." The senior advocate said: "There is a problem that the social worker allocated to a case controls the narrative and I see frequently in child contact cases and child referrals, that they find themselves seeking to prove an allegation - often in a haphazard way - and that isn't in the interests of justice or of the child." So what happened in the case reported on happens frequently. The result is that adults are accused of heinous crimes that never occurred and children are subjected to the type of abuse by social workers that took place here. And why? Not because they don't know better. After all, the rules are written down in black and white. Anyone may read them. But the type of zealotry that certain police officers and social workers bring to their perceived mission of proving the validity of any and all child abuse allegations regardless of how specious, apparently knows no bounds. In vain do the more responsible among them attempt to do the thing that is known to be right. The zealots will have none of it. What does it matter that the perils of their approach to child abuse allegations have been known for some 20 years? What does it matter if innocent people are jailed and children subjected to needless trauma and indignity? Why worry that their approach abuses the very children they're supposed to protect, children who have not been previously abused? Face it; there is a mindset that we see time and again in these situations. It holds that all allegations of child sexual abuse are to be believed, even in the absence of any evidence to support them. Does the child deny that he/she has been abused? No matter; he/she must be embarrassed, covering for a loved/feared adult, ignorant, unable to describe the abuse, etc. This mindset has no room for due process of law, for the presumption of innocence, for hearing the other side of the story. This mindset is unnaturally attracted to the idea of child sexual abuse. It is not enough to establish rules for the proper questioning of children. That was done long ago and yet, by the very people who should know most about those rules and their proper application, they are ignored. If rules did the trick, the abuse of Scottish children by child "protective" authorities would not be ongoing. But it is. No, rules are not the answer for these people. The answer is to fire the offenders and subject new hires to a rigorous vetting process that weeds out applicants with the mindset described above. Another answer is to subject them to civil suits for damages of the type Tonya Craft has filed. I don't know if that remedy is available in Scotland, but it should be. It is in this country and can be an extremely effective deterrent. And on that note, be advised that the sheriff investigating the case called for the two police officers and the social worker to be taken off of child abuse cases until they're properly trained. The police department did just that, But Edinburgh City Council insisted, despite having removed Ms Black from the case in question, it retained full confidence in the social worker and she remained on child protection duty. A council spokesman said: "We are satisfied that our social worker was acting in the best interests of the child and they continue to work in child protection. <a href="http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=4931" rel="nofollow">http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=4931</a> <h2>Comparing the signatures: Was Helen Wong's Signature Forged?</h2> <a href="http://images.fdv-93-005153.org/2005_12_01_Wong_signature_300ppi.gif" rel="nofollow"><img src="http://images.fdv-93-005153.org/2005_12_01_Wong_signature_300ppi_small.gif"></a> More typical Childers lies. (I suppose that's why they keep deleting it.) I suppose the fact that someone signed Helen Wong's name for her on the legal papers, misspelling it with two 'L's - Hellen - is a minor fact, that can safely be ignored ...? <a href="http://images.fdv-93-005153.org/1993_01_20_Wong_signature_300ppi.gif" rel="nofollow"><img src="http://images.fdv-93-005153.org/1993_01_20_Wong_signature_300ppi_small.gif"></a> Here, let's compare some more signatures. Here we see Helen Wong's signature in 1993: note the visible whitespace within each loop of each letter. <a href="http://images.fdv-93-005153.org/2005_09_25_Wong_signature_300ppi.gif" rel="nofollow"><img src="http://images.fdv-93-005153.org/2005_09_25_Wong_signature_300ppi_small.gif"></a> Here we see Helen Wong's signature in 2005 Where's the whitespace - gone? I accuse staff at WOMAN, Incorporated of fraud (intentional deception resulting in injury to another person, or, deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain), forgery (falsely signing plaintiff's signature, repeatedly) and perjury (falsely signing documents, under oath of perjury) as well as criminal conspiracy (coordinating their illegal activities with others' illegal activities, within and without the San Francisco Superior Court system, to better and further conceal this crime from public exposure). <h2>For the full story, please see <a href="http://www.fdv-93-005153.org" rel="nofollow">www.fdv-93-005153.org</a>.</h2> <h3>To contact the authorities about this case:</h3> <a href="http://www.sfdistrictattorney.org/" rel="nofollow">www.sfdistrictattorney.org</a> Criminal Division Hall of Justice 850 Bryant Street, Room 322 San Francisco, CA 94103 Special Operations Division 732 Brannan Street San Francisco, CA 94102 Bureau of Investigations - (415) 553-1030 SF District Attorney email: <a href="mailto:DistrictAttorney@Sfgov.org" rel="nofollow">DistrictAttorney@Sfgov.org</a> Kamala Harris' direct email: <a href="mailto:kamala.harris@sfgov.org" rel="nofollow">Kamala.Harris@Sfgov.org</a> ]]>

<![CDATA[I am tired of listening to everyone say to obey the law when Democrats do not care if illegal immigrants break the law. Democrats say they want amnesty or a path to citizenship for immigrants who disrespect our law by jumping our borders. Somehow, we are supposed to believe that these border jumpers will then become good citizens and obey future laws. Yeah, right! Not in your wildest dreams will these lawbreakers respect our laws. I wonder if the Democrats could be charged with aiding and abetting lawbreakers by condoning illegal immigrant activities, like ignoring the illegal activity of illegal immigrants jumping our border. If not aiding and abetting illegal activity, at least the Democrats are providing encouragement to illegal immigrants here and the millions that will come if Democrats get their way and forgive these fugitives. Any politician that boycotted or condemned Arizona's courageous law to reduce illegal immigration just laid down the welcome mat to the hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants fleeing Arizona. Mind you, these illegal immigrants fled before the Arizona law took effect, so the big fear tactic of the politicians that racial profiling was an issue did not occur. I just hope you taxpayers don't mind paying a few extra dollars for the increased illegal immigrant flow into your city and county. The Arizona politicians got tired of waiting for the "do-nothing" Congress and the president on the issue of unchecked, free flowing illegal immigrant flow into this country. Arizona is reducing their costs in welfare, education, and other services because they are reducing the illegal immigrant population. Guess where they are going California? Read the Arizona bill. I did. It puts the pressure on employers of illegal immigrants. And it's about time. The "do-nothing" Congress had a pittance of a fine on employers of illegal immigrants. Arizona's bright lawmakers realized that if you punish severely the employers of illegal immigrants, then the illegal immigrants will leave and go to immigrant-loving cities like San Jose, Sacramento, San Francisco, and LA. Must be those cities don't care about the budget impact.]]>

<![CDATA[Obama cracking down and crackers are liars! Liar Liar Pants on Fire!]]>

<![CDATA[And here is what you get from one of the paid trolls fuelling angry, racist, inaccurate, dishonest, drivel pushing the agendas of the likes of Meg. I doubt you ever lived in CA or you live in a world of your own making or you're only pecking out what you're told to. This is why America needs to relieve itself of the destructive, oppressive, manipulative influence of the vile right wing and their unmitigated bullshit! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 2010-07-29, 6:48PM PDT Reply to: comm-zgfgk-1870839043@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You say your "I am outraged at being bombarded by the massive ad campaign of Meg Whitman for months on end so she can buy her way to the governorship of California. Ebay is not the state of CA." Well, I have been in CA for 50 years and let me tell you that Jerry Brown is a piece of SHIT, Who once and Gov of CAL ran this CA into the ground.. As Mayor of Oakland he ran that city into the trash hole it is today, as Attorny General he's has allowed the criminals to be released onto our streets. HE IS A BIGGER PIECE OF SHIT THEN MEG. HE IS 100% a career politicain and any fool that votes this SHITHEAD INTO OFFICE IS AS BRAIN WASHED AS ALL THE OTHER FOOLS IN CAL, THAT VOTED FOR THE PIECE OF SHIT IN THE WHITE HOUSE. SO outraged at being bombarded by crap like yours on every CL post and blog around the country. ]]>

<![CDATA[WITHOUT CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL.....USING EXECUTIVES POWERS ACT JUST ANOTHER WAY THIS JERK IN THE WHITE IS TEARING UP THE CONSTITUTION AND MAKING HIS OWN RULES AS HE SEES FIT..... <a href="http://www.numbersusa.com/content/news/july-29-2010/uscis-memo-details-administrations-plan-provide-mass-amnesty-through-executive-act" rel="nofollow">http://www.numbersusa.com/content/news/july-29-2010/uscis-memo-details-administrations-plan-provide-mass-amnesty-through-executive-act</a> SEND THIS TO ALL WHO CARE ABOUT AMERICA ]]>

<![CDATA[So.......dumbass.....are you saying that if I move to AZ an unconstitutional law will magically become constitutional???????? And what the fuck is a thin vail? Jesus there are dumbasses here. Date: 2010-07-29, 9:12AM PDT Reply to: comm-axuwk-1869753295@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Now now Prof. Shitology all your baiting questions and accusations are a mere thin vail that doesn't really cover the fact that you are all talk and haven't the least bit of conviction to what you preach. We'll make it easier for you since even a wealthy person like yourself shouldn't have to buy property to prove a point, how about renting for a month or two an apartment were illegals in Arizona live, those you so steadfast defend as harmless and honest and then make posts detailing your experiences. That would be something, not just acting like a self-indulgent know it all as so many here are. If you haven't the balls to live up to your convictions nobody will take you seriously. The good people of Arizona on the other hand live next to and around the illegals and after years of suffering because of the way illegals bleed the system of funds they aren't entitled to and the massive crime they create, decided to enforce the Federal laws which you so vehemently protest against. You're like John Kerry and Charlie Rangel making speeches about the rich should pay their fair of taxes and then being caught themselves not paying and avoiding their own taxes! ]]>

<![CDATA[AMERICA'S GREAT LIE by Gerry Spence The idea that we should furnish the poor with a public defender has been an effort to save our nation from shame - for sending the poor to prison without adequate representation. But today the nation's public defender system has become a mockery of justice. To provide an accused with a public defender who has three hundred other cases to defend is simply to laugh in the face of both justice and the accused himself. It takes me months to prepare the average criminal case for trial. The trial itself can take weeks, even months. While O.J. Simpson was being tried in Los Angeles for murder, a case that cost millions to defend and months to conclude, another black man was being tried in the same courthouse for a similar murder. It took only three days for a jury to find him guilty. He had a public defender with scores of other cases to defend. Many prosecutors boast that they have over a 90 percent conviction rate. Little wonder. Under the present public defender system the prosecutors should enjoy one hundred percent convictions, and many in fact approach perfect conviction rates. The public defenders in seven states have finally refused to take on any new cases. It's about time. If I walked into court to defend my client and had never talked him, never previously opened his file, never discovered the witnesses against him, much less interviewed them, never reviewed the evidence in the hands of the prosecution, never demanded my clients rights to discovery, never read the cases relevant to the case at hand, never prepared the cross examination of the witnesses against my client, never ... and on and on, I would be guilty of legal malpractice. Every public defender who purports to represent an accused under circumstances in which he or she has neither the time nor the resources to fully defend the client is guilty of malpractice. These public defenders cannot be saved from malpractice because they are crushed under a ridiculous case load - some with even as many as five hundred cases or more. No one who was accused with such an attorney has received a fair trial and every such accused is entitled to an appeal on that basis alone. The judge must not sentence the accused under these circumstances because the judge would be taking part in a fraud on the system. Yet hundreds of thousands of indigent persons go to prison each year under circumstances no better than those outlined above. When I was coming up as a young prosecutor, the defendants were represented pro bono by the lawyers in the local bar. It was part of the duty of members of the bar to take part in the justice system. Today that idea is unheard of. The practice of law is first and foremost a money-making profession. I see nothing wrong with that notion, but what about giving back? Every trial lawyer should be required to take on a couple of pro bono cases every year. At our office we have a separate pro bono law firm and have for over ten years. It often brings us more satisfaction than our big money wins. The job of a lawyer is to represent the people - the lost, the forgotten, the damned, the hated, the voiceless and the poor. Indeed, God forbid, we may one day become one of those who are entitled to representation but cannot afford it. Every time an accused goes to prison without having received a fair trial we are one step closer to the loss of our own freedoms. Our rights are, in fact, being fought for by public defenders who can never fulfill their duty to their clients because of their pathetic, impossible, caseloads. When they fail, we are in danger. Our system becomes a hypocritical charade. And we prove, once and for all, that the promised justice for all in America is an evil lie that is imposed on the poor. If only those with money can receive justice, then how can we permit our children to recite a horrible falsehood in school when they chant, "with liberty and justice for all." That can no longer be the truth in America. ************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************** GERRY SPENCE IS A RENOWNED LAWYER AND PATRIOTIC AMERICAN WHO EVEN AT THE AGE OF 82, CONTINUES TO SHOW A KEEN INTEREST IN WANTING TO BETTER AMERICA FOR THE MASSES OF POORER AMERICANS BEING CAUGHT IN OUR UNDERFUNDED JUDICIAL SYSTEM.LAWYERS FOR POOR AMERICANS THANKS YOU MR.SPENCE FOR TAKING YOUR TIME AND INTEREST IN SPEAKING THE TRUTH ABOUT A JUDICIAL SYSTEM IN NEED OF C*H*A*N*G*E... ** WE CAN ONLY HOPE AND PRAY OTHER AMERICAN LAWYERS AND JUDGES WILL FOLLOW YOUR LEAD SO THE PROPER FINANCING CAN BE ALLOCATED BY OUR IVORY TOWER US CONGRESS ! *** ANYONE INTERESTED CAN GOOGLE OR YAHOO GERRY SPENCE ON THE WWW FOR MANY OTHER ENLIGHTENING HONEST ARTICLES. LAWYERS FOR POOR AMERICANS IS A VOLUNTEER WWW LOBBY THAT SINGS OUT 4 ALL OUR MIDDLE~CLASS & POORER AMERICANS. WE CAN BE FOUND WITH ALL SEARCH ENGINES BY OUR NAME,TELEPHONE NUMBER OR E MAIL ADDRESS. ALL OUR VARIOUS PREVIOUS WRITTEN COMMENTARY ARE FOUND DIFFERENTLY ON GOOGLE,YAHOO,AOL,BING,MSN ... ** WE ENJOY BRINGING THE GOOD LIFE TO ALL our felloe little Americans ** LAWYERS FOR POOR AMERICANS lawyersforpooreramericans@gmail.com 424-247-2013; ]]>

<![CDATA[If we the American people don't put a stop to Reid , Pelosi, Boxer you will have nothing left. These people are stealing you blind and as you can tell they are not doing with out a thing and that's because you are the ones giving it all to them , all they have done is lie on top of lie to you all and you deserve a better life the only reason they won't stand with Phoenix is because of all the votes that they will lose even if its not legal for them to vote Obama will let it pass anyway just to keep the Dem's in control when we all know they are the most cause of America being in such a hole now. You have to kick these people out if you want California to be the way it use to be . it is a Beautiful place to live and to visit but what to see people are doing to you are is unreal and its not helping you any at all. Vote for some who can keep a check book and and count pass 10 at lease pay their own taxes that's whats what bad they get by with all the cheating but we the people can't. what does that tell you one thing they don't care because its your money not theirs.]]>

<![CDATA[ CIA patsies groomed to take blame for 9/11 19 oswalds groomed for the long-term plan to create an ongoing "War on Terror" which would create the pretext for the attack of numerous nations, as well as the occupation and establishment of 100's of permanent US bases in key oil areas (transport and drilling) one of these bases near the largest and most valuable oil fields in the world has a shopping mall and auto dealership built into the base.. J. Michael Springmann, formerly chief of the visa section at the U.S. Consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, has testified that he rejected hundreds of suspicious visa applications by Saudi Arabian men similar to those named as the 9/11 Hijackers Patsies when we was head of the consular section of the US embassy in Jeddah, but C.I.A. officers repeatedly overruled him and ordered the visas to be issued. <a href="http://info-wars.org/2010/02/10/cia-ordered-visas-for-15-of-the-19-911-hijackers-in-jeddah/" rel="nofollow">http://info-wars.org/2010/02/10/cia-ordered-visas-for-15-of-the-19-911-hijackers-in-jeddah/</a> London Patsies- Replay of the pristine 9/11 passport <a href="http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/july2005/130705pristinepassport.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/july2005/130705pristinepassport.htm</a> Mahmoud Ahmad and The Secret Cult of 9-11 <a href="http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/mahmoud_ahmed.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/mahmoud_ahmed.htm</a> Mohammed Atta's CIA buddies at Venice Airport <a href="http://www.madcowprod.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.madcowprod.com/</a> <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNsOmWhr2cg" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNsOmWhr2cg</a>]]>

<![CDATA[You say your "I am outraged at being bombarded by the massive ad campaign of Meg Whitman for months on end so she can buy her way to the governorship of California. Ebay is not the state of CA." Well, I have been in CA for 50 years and let me tell you that Jerry Brown is a piece of SHIT, Who once and Gov of CAL ran this CA into the ground.. As Mayor of Oakland he ran that city into the trash hole it is today, as Attorny General he's has allowed the criminals to be released onto our streets. HE IS A BIGGER PIECE OF SHIT THEN MEG. HE IS 100% a career politicain and any fool that votes this SHITHEAD INTO OFFICE IS AS BRAIN WASHED AS ALL THE OTHER FOOLS IN CAL, THAT VOTED FOR THE PIECE OF SHIT IN THE WHITE HOUSE. SO outraged at being bombarded by crap like yours on every CL post and blog around the country. ]]>

<![CDATA[Those behind the massively (self) funded marketing campaign to buy Meg Whitman the governership of California so she can get busy serving those she is really working on behalf of (big business interests) are willing to employ any and every tactic they muster - from the vile negative attack ads that distort the facts and deny the truth to repetative plea of a plan...Meg has a plan...talk to Meg about her plan. This is the folksy Meg, whose just like the rest of us and has the same interests as we do, oh and her success in business would make her a shoe in success in government - just like being a successful actor made Arnie such a great governor? These same people defining this campaign hope we Californian's are just stupid enough to buy the crap they're peddling for Meg. Turning the state over to the likes of the pandering for power GOP is a mistake. I'm not saying the Dems are great....they're not. Our politics are seriously broken and there is plenty of blame to go around but whereas the Dems may exhibit signs of ineptness and less then solid comprehension of what works best on behalf of the country, the GOP is the bought and paid for party of the most mighty and powerful. That they use the mental midgets of the evangelical movement who can pony up pawns to cast votes on their behalf (because let's face it - they need their numbers if they hope to stand a chance & these people will do what they're told and show up to vote & vote for who they're told to vote for) makes them evil and the impact they have on our society and country disastrous. Despite all the attacking, complaining and finger pointing they champion, as if they were innocent of perpertrating any of the mess we're forced to deal with now (these are the morons who gave us eight years of Bush - the bimbo, pickle-brained, dimwit who had no business as president of the US - EVER!). Their priorities are why the US is in a state of big mess. They take no responsibility for any of it, they continually blame their opposition and they hope we - the American people - will buy their bull, ignore their culpability and surrender our welfare to the self-serving, greedy, destructive forces which drives this machine who truly only serves the very, very rich and very, very powerful who only cares about more (for themselves) at any cost. Meg and her backers want to hold the power in CA to serve their interests - not ours. I am outraged at being bombarded by the massive ad campaign of Meg Whitman for months on end so she can buy her way to the governorship of California. Ebay is not the state of CA. And the flippant approach of tossing out every type of ad and hoping one of them will stick on everyone revolts me. This woman has no business at the helm of CA. And if the people with enough consciousness also manage to show up and vote when the day comes, Meg Whitman will not be the governor of California. If only the simpleton bimbots who follow instruction show up to vote - she stands a chance. I hope this state will prove better then that and the majority shows up - those with enough sense to know we deserve better then Meg Whitman as the governor of this state. I can't wait for the day I NEVER have to hear or see her BS ads again. Encourage everyone you know in CA to ensure we don't get stuck with the billionaire who bought the governorship. ]]>

<![CDATA[but, the US gov't "investigation" doesn't mention Venice, FL at all? silly gov't.. <a href="http://hidhist.wordpress.com/2010/07/03/mohamed-atta-loved-pork-chops-and-49-other-things-you-may-not-know/" rel="nofollow">http://hidhist.wordpress.com/2010/07/03/mohamed-atta-loved-pork-chops-and-49-other-things-you-may-not-know/</a> 1. In Venice Florida, Mohamed Atta lived for two months with an American stripper/lingerie model named Amanda Keller. 2. Atta loved to party. He was out with Keller nearly every night they were together. He was a heavy drinker, snorted coke, was a stylish dresser and wore expensive jewelry. 3. According to Keller, Atta loved pork chops. 4. Keller dumped him after he embarrassed her at a night club by dancing, poorly, atop a speaker (“doing that old ‘Roxbury head bob’ thing, you know”?) 5. Atta revenged himself later on Keller by returning to the apartment they’d shared and killing her cat and kittens, disemboweling and dismembering them in her apartment for her to find. 6. In Miami, Atta consorted with women known to be linked to the Mafia. 7. Atta’s email list included names of people who worked for defense contractors. One, for instance, worked for Canadian firm Virtual Prototypes, which helped develop the avionics for F-15, F-22 and B-2. 8. Atta was enrolled as a student at the International Officer’s School of Maxwell Airforce Base, and witnesses recall him having been introduced around at an officers’ club party. 9. Atta was fluent in at least Arabic, English, German, French and Hebrew. 10. One day when Atta was rummaging through his flight bag, Keller got a look inside. Her words: “The thing the FBI was most interested in was his pilot bag. They asked about it a lot. He kept it locked, and they wanted to know whether I had ever seen anything in it. I told them yes. One day he opened it briefly, and there were a lot of papers in it, and there was a blue log book in a different language. Mohamed was fluent in almost any language you can think of. He had a kind of Daytimer in there, too. And a folder with all these different ID’s in it. And that’s when I saw one – because it fell out – a little blue and white thing the size of a driver’s license. It had his picture on it, and it looked like a mug shot, or a prison shot. And it didn’t look like him, and I asked him, ‘Who is this?’ “And he said, ‘that’s me.’ He told me it had been taken back when he was in some kind of militia-type deal, like a military-type deal, he said. He compared it to our military only they teach you different tactics. He didn’t elaborate. “He didn’t say where it was from, either. But the writing looked like a cross between Hebrew and Arabic, those frilly little lines. He told me he spoke Hebrew. I said bullshit. So he started speaking it, and I guess he did. “He told me that he went to different countries and studied. He had pilot’s license from several different countries. But all the pictures looked different. All the names were different. He had a license to fly from just about every country he had been to. He went to pilot’s school in all these countries.” 11. Atta, Keller, a stripper named Linda and two Germans, Peter and Johan, partied for three days in Key West. Atta paid for everything. Rented three rooms, one just for the men’s luggage, which Keller says contained drugs. The men had a business meeting the women were not permitted to attend. Met with people, Keller says, who flew in just to meet Atta. Somber and quiet after meeting. (Key West Airport a known drug transit point. The Sheriff used to be under orders to keep the dope sniffing dogs off airplanes, and at one time even sent patrol cars to escort the drugs to Miami.) 12. Atta was already a licensed pilot when he arrived in the US. Licenses from many different countries. He had the privileges of an instructor while he was at Huffman Aviation, and may have helped pilot South American drug runs. 13. The FBI timeline says Atta left Venice Florida in December 2000 after completing his flight training. But he didn’t. Dozens of locals say different – his landlord, neighbours, cab drivers, restaurant employees and his girlfriend, for a few instances – and have been told not to talk about it by federal authorities. The FBI publicly sought information regarding Atta’s time in various US locations, but not Venice Florida, where he spent most of his time in the US. Why the intentional misdirection? What are they trying to keep hidden? 14. Under pressure from the FBI, and despite numerous witnesses who had known them together, Keller publicly retracted her story of having lived with Atta, saying he’d been another hijacker named Mohammed, no last name, who seems to have only existed to get Atta out of this story that didn’t fit the official version. 15. Six nights before the attack, at a bar called Shuckums in Ft Lauderdale, Atta and two companions got drunk. The FBI showed up at the bar just 12 hours after the attack with pictures of two of them, one Atta, saying only “they were on the plane and passed away.” Manager Tony Amos and bartender Patricia Idrissi identified both. Manager Amos said they’d gotten “wasted,” Atta drank Stoli vodka for three straight hours. Atta blasphemed: “F*ck God!” he’s said to have cursed. 16. The witnesses then retracted the story of Atta being drunk. They now said he’d only drank cranberry juice the entire evening. Both Amos and Idrissi have gone, no one knows where, but the current bartender says she believes their leaving was somehow 9/11 related. 17. Fourteen of the 9/11 hijackers made Florida their base of operation, and clustered around two flight schools. What is it about Florida, and these flight schools, that drew them? 18. Atta and Marwan Al-Shehhi paid $28,000 each to Rudi Dekkers’ Huffman Aviation for flight instruction that, the chief instructor of a neighbouring school said, was available at dozens of other nearby locations for a fraction of the price. Why did they pay an inflated price to Dekkers? 19. Dekkers’ and his financier, Wally Hilliard, purchased the flight school just months before Atta and the other hijackers began arriving. Before their purchase, the flight school catered to largely American students. After, student body became 80% foreign, mostly Middle Eastern. Yeslam bin Laden, Osama’s brother, sent students there for his business. 20. Atta also “trained” for a time at Arne Kruithof’s Florida Flight Training Center, a block away from Huffman Aviation. Amanda Keller says it is where he would go to replenish his cocaine stash. 21. Though Dutchmen Dekkers and Kruithof claimed they had not known each other before each coincidently purchased flight training schools in Venice shortly before terrorists began arriving for training, witnesses claim the two had known each other well for years before. 22. Wally Hilliard is a supposedly-retired, born again insurance executive from the Midwest (motto for his insurance company had been “Hate Sin, Fight Communism, Back the Pack!”), who upon arriving in Florida entered into aviation businesses with an assortment of criminal and covert intelligence elements. 23. Dekkers and Hilliard had not been in the flight school business before they made the purchase. They paid an inflated price for the school, and did no due diligence before the purchase. They lost millions, but this was apparently not a problem. Charlie Voss, former employee of Dekkers and an Iran/Contra pilot who’d also flown “Northern Alliance guys” in Afghanistan in the 1980s, and who had given Atta and Marwan Al-Shehhi a place to stay for a few weeks when they first arrived in Venice Florida: “Rudi’s greedy, and when you’re greedy you can be used for something…. When something doesn’t make obvious business sense, sometimes it’s because things are being done for another reason that doesn’t have a lot to do with dollars and cents. His business did not add up.” 24. Dekkers went from broke to flush very quickly, without having business success with the flight school. One observer said “He didn’t even have the money to buy gas for an airplane… and yet a year later he shows up and plops a million seven, a million eight or two million dollars on the table as if it were paper money.” 25. The deputy in charge of Venice Fl airport security: “Wally and Rudi never talk inside a building, they go out to an airplane and talk inside the plane.” 26. Dekkers’ claimed he had very little interaction with Atta, and that he never saw him again after December 2000. But numerous witnesses in Venice claim Dekkers and Atta were close, and were seen at a restaurant together just two weeks before the attack. 27. Hilliard denied knowing Atta. Keller recalled, on a visit to the airport, having Hilliard ask her, “What’s a nice girl like you doing with a guy like Mohamed?” 28. Before the attack, Dekkers was having trouble paying rent on flight school. It was so bad, it was a story in the Venice paper when he paid rent. One month before attack, he stopped having trouble. Since attack, every aviation concern at Venice airport has been late at least once with their monthly rent, except for Dekkers’. 29. Both the DEA and US Customs had been interested in Dekkers as far back as 1993. He was suspected of smuggling drugs and computer chips. 30. Less than three weeks after Atta and Marwan Al-Shehi began flying lessons at Huffman Aviation, a Lear jet owned by its financier, Wally Hilliard, carrying 43 pounds of heroin was seized by the DEA. Authorities called it the biggest seizure of heroin ever in central Florida. 31. The passengers, Venezuelan nationals, were arrested, but the pilot wasn’t charged, said a DEA spokesman, “because of lack of evidence.” This, despite the fact the pilot, Diego Levine-Texar, ignored agents demands that he drop his cell phone, which had to be pried from his hand at gunpoint. Affidavit of the DEA agent: “Based on my experience I know that narcotics traffickers maintain frequent contact with one another while transporting narcotics… I believe Levine-Texar attempted to contact other accomplices as to the presence of agents and other law enforcement officials.” Information about Levine-Texar is considered “sensitive.” 32. But the DEA refused to return the plane to Hilliard. It was auctioned off. DEA said they had “reasons.” Unusual for a so-called “innocent man” to be denied the return of his possession, or compensation. 33. After Hilliard lost his plane to the DEA auction, he was loaned a plane worth $2 million for just one dollar by Truman Arnold, former chief fundraiser for the Democratic Party, who figured in the Whitewater investigation. 34. John Villada, an aviation executive in Naples Florida: “After Wally’s plane was impounded with the heroin and his pilots had machine guns stuck in their faces, the DEA came to visit our maintenance facility and Wally shouted out to me – right in front of the DEA guy – ‘Make sure all the heroin and cocaine gets hidden!’” Hilliard’s mock warning seemed to show the DEA how little he thought of them, and how well he was protected. 35. The paperwork showed the same plane had made approximately 30 weekly round trips to Venezuela with the same passengers, and they always paid cash. “They obviously weren’t even bothering to hide what they were doing,” said one observer. 36. Hilliard had got his Lear jet from World Jet Inc, owned by drug smuggling brothers Don and Bill Whittington, who had supplied the plane to CIA drug smuggler Barry Seal. 37. The Sarasota County Drug interdiction people were told that Dekkers and Hilliard had a green light to operation and that they were to stay away from them, that they… may have had some type of government protection. And the local Venice Police Department were also warned to leave them alone. 38. A former Huffman executive, speaking about the hijackers: “Early on I gleaned that these guys had government protection. They were let into this country for a specific purpose. It was a business deal.” 39. The FBI visited the home of this executive just four hours after the attacks. The purpose has been not to investigate, but to intimidate him into silence. The man says his phones were bugged, and thinks pilots were “double agents.” He quit the flight school fearing for his life, and claims he knows too much about Wally Hillier, saying he “has a family to think about.” 40. Jeb accompanied the FBI when they removed the flight school records on the early morning of September 12, and flew them to Washington. 41. Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris have flown and endorsed Hilliard’s air carrier. 42. In the days following 9/11, a number of Saudis fled the country from Florida after the attacks. They flew on Wally Hillier’s charter aircraft to private fields of military contractor Raytheon, and departed on a 747. 43. After the attacks, a virtually non-existent company that operated out of Venice Airport under Huffman’s license called Britannia Aviation was awarded a five-year, multi-million dollar contract to run the maintenance facility at Lychburg Virginia Regional Airport. (FYI, Lynchburg is the home of Jerry Falwell’s Liberty Baptist University.) Britannia did not have an FAA license to work on planes and showed assets of only $750. It was chosen over Virginia Aviation, which showed a multi-million dollar balance and boasted more than 40 employees. 44. Britannia executive Peter Martens boasted that his company had been providing maintenance at Venice Airport for “Caribe Air,” which is a notorious CIA proprietary carrier. 45. A source at the Drug Enforcement Agency says that Britannia has a “green light” from the DEA, and that local police had been warned to leave Britannia alone. 46. Martens also has ties to Falwell, having met his wife at his university in Lynchburg. 47. Many of the Venice flight trainers moonlight by flying “missionary flights” to Central and South America, for such organizations as Pat Robertson’s Operation Hope. (Are mission groups being used as fronts for covert ops?) 48. Most of Atta’s closest associates in Venice were not Arabs, but Europeans with connection to the drug trade. 49. Though flight school owners Dekkers and Kruithof had before crashed, within weeks of each other in 2002, both had near fatal crashes. Wreckage was destroyed before it could be examined. 50. According to his girlfriend, Atta was a big Beastie Boys fan.]]>

<![CDATA[ <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-bell-impact-20100729,0,6243085.story" rel="nofollow">http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-bell-impact-20100729,0,6243085.story</a> <a href="http://teapartyusa.homestead.com/news.html" rel="nofollow">http://teapartyusa.homestead.com/news.html</a> keep up the pressure to expose your local corruption! ]]>

<![CDATA[So are we. Politics isn't supposed to be about attacking one side or the other. We don't allow noise, just intelligent debate. <a href="http://www.wonksandpundits.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.wonksandpundits.com</a>]]>

<![CDATA[<a href="http://911blogger.com/news/2009-07-31/bombshell-bin-laden-worked-us-until-911" rel="nofollow">http://911blogger.com/news/2009-07-31/bombshell-bin-laden-worked-us-until-911</a> Bombshell: Bin Laden worked for US until 9/11 Submitted by simuvac on Fri, 07/31/2009 - 10:56am * Osama Bin Laden * Sibel Edmonds From Luke Ryland's blog Against All Enemies (links at original): Former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds dropped a bombshell on the Mike Malloy radio show, guest-hosted by Brad Friedman (audio, partial transcript). In the interview, Sibel says that the US maintained 'intimate relations' with Bin Laden, and the Taliban, "all the way until that day of September 11." These 'intimate relations' included using Bin Laden for 'operations' in Central Asia, including Xinjiang, China. These 'operations' involved using al Qaeda and the Taliban in the same manner "as we did during the Afghan and Soviet conflict," that is, fighting 'enemies' via proxies. As Sibel has previously described, and as she reiterates in this latest interview, this process involved using Turkey (with assistance from 'actors from Pakistan, and Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia') as a proxy, which in turn used Bin Laden and the Taliban and others as a proxy terrorist army. Control of Central Asia The goals of the American 'statesmen' directing these activities included control of Central Asia's vast energy supplies and new markets for military products. The Americans had a problem, though. They needed to keep their fingerprints off these operations to avoid a) popular revolt in Central Asia ( Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan), and b) serious repercussions from China and Russia. They found an ingenious solution: Use their puppet-state Turkey as a proxy, and appeal to both pan-Turkic and pan-Islam sensibilities. Turkey, a NATO ally, has a lot more credibility in the region than the US and, with the history of the Ottoman Empire, could appeal to pan-Turkic dreams of a wider sphere of influence. The majority of the Central Asian population shares the same heritage, language and religion as the Turks. In turn, the Turks used the Taliban and al Qaeda, appealing to their dreams of a pan-Islamic caliphate (Presumably. Or maybe the Turks/US just paid very well.) According to Sibel: This started more than a decade-long illegal, covert operation in Central Asia by a small group in the US intent on furthering the oil industry and the Military Industrial Complex, using Turkish operatives, Saudi partners and Pakistani allies, furthering this objective in the name of Islam. Uighurs Sibel was recently asked to write about the recent situation with the Uighurs in Xinjiang, but she declined, apart from saying that "our fingerprint is all over it." Of course, Sibel isn't the first or only person to recognize any of this. Eric Margolis, one of the best reporters in the West on matters of Central Asia, stated that the Uighurs in the training camps in Afghanistan up to 2001: "were being trained by Bin Laden to go and fight the communist Chinese in Xinjiang, and this was not only with the knowledge, but with the support of the CIA, because they thought they might use them if war ever broke out with China." And also that: "Afghanistan was not a hotbed of terrorism, these were commando groups, guerrilla groups, being trained for specific purposes in Central Asia." In a separate interview, Margolis said: "That illustrates Henry Kissinger's bon mot that the only thing more dangerous than being America's enemy is being an ally, because these people were paid by the CIA, they were armed by the US, these Chinese Muslims from Xinjiang, the most-Western province. The CIA was going to use them in the event of a war with China, or just to raise hell there, and they were trained and supported out of Afghanistan, some of them with Osama Bin Laden's collaboration. The Americans were up to their ears with this." Rogues Gallery Last year, Sibel came up with a brilliant idea to expose some of the criminal activity that she is forbidden to speak about: she published eighteen photos, titled "Sibel Edmonds’ State Secrets Privilege Gallery," of people involved the operations that she has been trying to expose. One of those people is Anwar Yusuf Turani, the so-called 'President-in-exile' of East Turkistan (Xinjiang). This so-called 'government-in-exile' was 'established' on Capitol Hill in September, 2004, drawing a sharp rebuke from China. Also featured in Sibel's Rogues Gallery was 'former' spook Graham Fuller, who was instrumental in the establishment of Turani's 'government-in-exile' of East Turkistan. Fuller has written extensively on Xinjiang, and his "Xinjiang Project" for Rand Corp is apparently the blueprint for Turani's government-in-exile. Sibel has openly stated her contempt for Mr. Fuller. Susurluk The Turkish establishment has a long history of mingling matters of state with terrorism, drug trafficking and other criminal activity, best exemplified by the 1996 Susurluk incident which exposed the so-called Deep State. Sibel states that "a few main Susurluk actors also ended up in Chicago where they centered 'certain' aspects of their operations (Especially East Turkistan-Uighurs)." One of the main Deep State actors, Mehmet Eymur, former Chief of Counter-Terrorism for Turkey's intelligence agency, the MIT, features in Sibel's Rogues Gallery. Eymur was given exile in the US. Another member of Sibel's gallery, Marc Grossman was Ambassador to Turkey at the time that the Susurluk incident exposed the Deep State. He was recalled shortly after, prior to the end of his assignment, as was Grossman's underling, Major Douglas Dickerson, who later tried to recruit Sibel into the spying ring. The modus operandi of the Susurluk gang is the same as the activities that Sibel describes as taking place in Central Asia, the only difference is that this activity was exposed in Turkey a decade ago, whereas the organs of the state in the US, including the corporate media, have successfully suppressed this story. Chechnya, Albania & Kosovo Central Asia is not the only place where American foreign policy makers have shared interests with Bin Laden. Consider the war in Chechnya. As I documented here, Richard Perle and Stephen Solarz (both in Sibel's gallery) joined other leading neocon luminaries such as Elliott Abrams, Kenneth Adelman, Frank Gaffney, Michael Ledeen, James Woolsey, and Morton Abramowitz in a group called the American Committee for Peace in Chechnya (ACPC). For his part, Bin Laden donated $25 million to the cause, as well as numerous fighters, and technical expertise, establishing training camps. US interests also converged with those of al-Qaeda in Kosovo and Albania. Of course, it is not uncommon for circumstances to arise where 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend.' On the other hand, in a transparent democracy, we expect a full accounting of the circumstances leading up to a tragic event like 9/11. The 9/11 Commission was supposed to provide exactly that. State Secrets Sibel has famously been dubbed the most gagged woman in America, having the State Secrets Privilege imposed on her twice. Her 3.5 hour testimony to the 9/11 Commission has been entirely suppressed, reduced to a single footnote which refers readers to her classified testimony. In the interview, she says that the information that was classified in her case specifically identifies that the US was using Bin Laden and the Taliban in Central Asia, including Xinjiang. In the interview, Sibel reiterates that when invoking the gag orders, the US government claims that it is protecting " 'sensitive diplomatic relations,' protecting Turkey, protecting Israel, protecting Pakistan, protecting Saudi Arabia..." This is no doubt partially true, but it is also true that they are protecting themselves too, and it is a crime in the US to use classification and secrecy to cover up crimes. As Sibel says in the interview: I have information about things that our government has lied to us about... those things can be proven as lies, very easily, based on the information they classified in my case, because we did carry very intimate relationship with these people, and it involves Central Asia, all the way up to September 11. Summary: The bombshell here is obviously that certain people in the US were using Bin Laden up to September 11, 2001. It is important to understand why: the US outsourced terror operations to al Qaeda and the Taliban for many years, promoting the Islamization of Central Asia in an attempt to personally profit off military sales as well as oil and gas concessions. The silence by the US government on these matters is deafening. So, too, is the blowback. . . . That's your cue, NeoCons Speak Up Patriots!! I Do................. AND So Should YOU !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Peace!! ]]>

<![CDATA[Rep. Frank Wolf, R-Va., has called on the White House to re-impanel the Sept. 11 Commission to investigate the FBI's post–Sept. 11 probe of Anwar Awlaki, an American-born imam who met privately with some of the Sept. 11 hijackers before fleeing the country and inspiring other terrorists, including the Fort Hood attacker. Wolf points to recent revelations that the Justice Department issued a felony arrest warrant for Awlaki (aka Aulaqi) in June 2002, when he was living in Northern Virginia and preaching at a local mosque – only to withdraw the warrant the day before Awlaki returned to the U.S. from a trip to Saudi Arabia. <a href="http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=179093" rel="nofollow">http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=179093</a> I see a great opportunity to open up a can of worms. ]]>

<![CDATA[ Two California Newspapers Review the Role of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, September 2009 <a href="http://www.puppetgov.com/2010/02/15/the-media-response-to-the-growing-influence-of-the-911-truth-movement/" rel="nofollow">http://www.puppetgov.com/2010/02/15/the-media-response-to-the-growing-influence-of-the-911-truth-movement/</a> ......................................................................................................................................................................... Two California Newspapers Review the Role of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, September 2009 In September 2009, Metroactive (Silicon Valley’s number-one weekly magazine) and the Santa Barbara Independent, each published slightly different versions of a long article on the controversy surrounding the WTC building collapses.32 The Independent article – entitled “Twin Towers, Twin Myths?” – begins: “One of the crucial technical disputes in American history, perhaps second only to global warming, is underway. It pits hundreds of government technicians who say the World Trade Center buildings were brought down by airplane impact against hundreds of professional architects and building engineers who insist that the Twin Towers could never have collapsed solely due to the planes and are calling for a new independent investigation. It is a fight that is not going away and is likely to get louder as more building trade professionals sign on to one side or the other.”33 The version in MetroActive – called “Explosive Theory” – says “[E]ight years after 9/11, a growing organization of building trades professionals suspect that there was more to the event than the government will admit.” It then gives a short history of Gage’s now 1,000-strong organization, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE).34 Deputy Director Michael J. Heimbach of the FBI’s counter-terrorism division, this article adds, had recently acknowledged in a letter to the organization that Gage’s presentation is “backed by thorough research and analysis.” One local AE member was quoted as saying “it takes too much energy” – energy that was not there – to collapse the buildings at free-fall speed, given the resistance that steel offers. This was borne out, this member continued, by a team of scientists “working at technical laboratories in the United States and Denmark [who] reported in April that analysis of dust …gathered at the World Trade Center found evidence of the potent incendiary/explosive ’super thermite,’ used by the military.” Almost half of this article deals with the controversy over whether nano-thermite was used, with most of the space allotted to evidence supplied by the 9/11 Truth Movement. Near the end, however, spokesman Michael Newman is brought in to defend NIST’s research, saying there was “no need” to test the dust for thermite. But the last word was given to engineer Ed Munyak of AE, who said: “The fact is that the collapses don’t resemble any fire-induced behavior of structures, but it exactly mimics a controlled demolition, so why not investigate that? It’s all very suspicious and that’s why an independent investigation is needed so we can all learn from this.” “Explosive Theory” also focuses pointedly on the growing number of professional organizations and retired officials calling for a new investigation, including: …two dozen retired U.S. military brass and eight former U.S. State Department officials, along with a number of Republicans who have served in high federal positions since President Reagan, including former Assistant Treasury Secretary Paul Craig Roberts and former Reagan administration Assistant Defense Secretary (and retired Marine Corps colonel) Ronald D. Ray. The version in the Santa Barbara Independent concludes with an unusually candid observation: And how would America deal with such an investigation against the backdrop of suppositions that some officials in government were complicit? This idea is virtually unthinkable to most of the public, much less something the American political system can handle…The forces of denial, in the system and in most of our minds, are innately powerful and probably sufficient to mitigate against a reopened investigation. Despite this, [Richard] Gage [of AE] sees his role as provoking a better investigation. Concluding Comment: (Independent). The authors of this article, rather than referring to “conspiracy theorists,” present the 9/11 issue as a “technical dispute” of historic importance. Both versions of the article represent a 180-degree turnaround in American newspaper reporting, providing a useful introduction to the long-ignored research by independent professionals. The Santa Barbara Independent, curious about public opinion rather than seeking to hide it, published a local poll asking if conspiracy was behind the collapses: 75% of respondents answered “yes”.35 ]]>

<![CDATA[Who’s Afraid of Sibel Edmonds? The gagged whistleblower goes on the record. By Sibel Edmonds and Philip Giraldi <a href="http://www.amconmag.com/article/2009/nov/01/00006/" rel="nofollow">http://www.amconmag.com/article/2009/nov/01/00006/</a> Excerpts: EDMONDS: Absolutely. And we also had Pentagon officials doing the same thing. We were looking at Richard Perle and Douglas Feith. They had a list of individuals in the Pentagon broken down by access to certain types of information. Some of them would be policy related, some of them would be weapons-technology related, some of them would be nuclear-related. Perle and Feith would provide the names of those Americans, officials in the Pentagon, to Grossman, together with highly sensitive personal information: this person is a closet gay; this person has a chronic gambling issue; this person is an alcoholic. The files on the American targets would contain things like the size of their mortgages or whether they were going through divorces. One Air Force major I remember was going through a really nasty divorce and a child custody fight. They detailed all different kinds of vulnerabilities. ----------- GIRALDI: So they were doing favors for other reasons. Both Feith and Perle were lobbyists for Turkey and also were involved with Israel on defense contracts, including some for Northrop Grumman, which Feith represented in Israel. EDMONDS: They had arrangements with various companies, some of them members of the American Turkish Council. They had arrangements with Kissinger’s group, with Northrop Grumman, with former secretary of state James Baker’s group, and also with former national security adviser Brent Scowcroft. The monitoring of the Turks picked up contacts with Feith, Wolfowitz, and Perle in the summer of 2001, four months before 9/11. They were discussing with the Turkish ambassador in Washington an arrangement whereby the U.S. would invade Iraq and divide the country. The UK would take the south, the rest would go to the U.S. They were negotiating what Turkey required in exchange for allowing an attack from Turkish soil. The Turks were very supportive, but wanted a three-part division of Iraq to include their own occupation of the Kurdish region. The three Defense Department officials said that would be more than they could agree to, but they continued daily communications to the ambassador and his defense attaché in an attempt to convince them to help. Meanwhile Scowcroft, who was also the chairman of the American Turkish Council, Baker, Richard Armitage, and Grossman began negotiating separately for a possible Turkish protectorate. Nothing was decided, and then 9/11 took place. Scowcroft was all for invading Iraq in 2001 and even wrote a paper for the Pentagon explaining why the Turkish northern front would be essential. I know Scowcroft came off as a hero to some for saying he was against the war, but he was very much for it until his client’s conditions were not met by the Bush administration. --------- EDMONDS: The seeding operation started before Marc Grossman arrived at the State Department. The Turkish agents had a network of Turkish professors in various universities with access to government information. Their top source was a Turkish-born professor of nuclear physics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He was useful because MIT would place a bunch of Ph.D. or graduate-level students in various nuclear facilities like Sandia or Los Alamos, and some of them were able to work for the Air Force. He would provide the list of Ph.D. students who should get these positions. In some cases, the Turkish military attaché would ask that certain students be placed in important positions. And they were not necessarily all Turkish, but the ones they selected had struck deals with the Turkish agents to provide information in return for money. If for some reason they had difficulty getting a secuity clearance, Grossman would ensure that the State Department would arrange to clear them. In exchange for the information that these students would provide, they would be paid $4,000 or $5,000. And the information that was sold to the two Saudis in Detroit went for something like $350,000 or $400,000. ]]>

<![CDATA[Just another loud mouth black " liberal" trying to divert corruption from themselves. ]]>

<![CDATA[W.D.C == Witchy Dik KuntZ Racketeering Goblins treasonous antitrust crime scene USA Usual Scam Artists or Usual Suspect Aholes Foreign Owened Corp. by creditors FBI Foreign Brainwashed Intel. or F'd Beyond INcredulous "we pick on little guys" CIA Communist Infiltrating Association or Common Inbred Aholes "we pick on bigger little guys" NSA No sanity attached "we pick on everyone, w/ severe prejudice" FED Free Extortion Degenerates BIS Bankster International Scammers IMF I'm F'd, now Ur2 WB World Bankruptcy inducer and colluders UN UNder our regjeme Bureaucraps, have no ethics. Life stripped of wisdom~! money grubbers mantra. FORCED march to cornholetopia: The int-scam-artists. New tune to humm "death camp march" Does Life make U zick? good, ha-ha~Establicraps We hate happy people inc. Mutual massage and supremists soc. has all the answers. Establicrooks cook the books. banksters on steroids Crypto internationalists hiding in plain sight. hands in your pockets and on your privates, protected my hords of uniformed brown nosers. ]]>

<![CDATA[First I agree with you.. Fisrt thing we should all do if we are pulled over and asked for ID is refuse to show it, Why IF THE illegal's don't have to show why should we? Next When you go to court and are in front of the Judge, Go ahead and show you DL / ID and the he will drop that charge, Next Go off on that Judge and let him or her know how fucked up they are for not going after illegal's.. Make your Point. ]]>

<![CDATA[<a href="http://911blogger.com/" rel="nofollow">http://911blogger.com/</a> Condoleezza Rice/Aretha Franklin Concert Protested by 9/11 Truthers Published July 28, 2010 by: Mark Whittington While Condoleezza Rice and Aretha Franklin made beautiful music inside the Mann Music Center at Fairmount Park in Philadelphia, two or three 9/11 truthers gathered outside to protest. The only thing I can say is, cool sound track, crazy people with too much time on their hands. [ View youtube Video: <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoTegjWPd2U&feature=player_embedded" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoTegjWPd2U&feature=player_embedded</a> ] Peace, Patriots!! ]]>

<![CDATA[The presence of reflectors on the Moon has been used to rebut claims that the Apollo landings were faked. For example, the APOLLO Collaboration photon pulse return graph, shown here, has a pattern consistent with a retroreflector array near a known landing site.]]>

<![CDATA[It won't matter that LONG LEGED MACK DADDY IN THE WHITE HOUSE WILL SEE THAT THEY WALK FREE..]]>

<![CDATA[<a href="http://911truth.org/article.php?story=20100727120712487" rel="nofollow">http://911truth.org/article.php?story=20100727120712487</a> <a href="http://911blogger.com/news/2010-07-29/response-chip-berlet%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%9Ctoxic-democracy-conspiracy-theories-demonization-and-scapegoating%E2%80%9D-peter-phillips-and-mi" rel="nofollow">http://911blogger.com/news/2010-07-29/response-chip-berlet%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%9Ctoxic-democracy-conspiracy-theories-demonization-and-scapegoating%E2%80%9D-peter-phillips-and-mi</a> By Peter Phillips and Mickey Huff July 26, 2010 Media Freedom Foundation/ProjectCensored.org In his recent essay "Toxic to Democracy," Political Research Associates (PRA) Senior Analyst Chip Berlet uses the very same methods of demonization by association that he so strongly opposes. Berlet convolutes historical context, ideological differences, and progressives vis-à-vis extreme conservative/neo-con/libertarians in a diatribe of meaninglessness. Berlet lumps valid academic research on State Crimes Against Democracy (SCADs) in with anti-Semitic jingoism and far right wing extremism. He suggests that any research that even implies some sort of conspiracy is dangerous and suspect, seemingly forgetting a long list of proven US and other government conspiracies (SCADs) including: Operation Mockingbird, COINTELPRO, Gulf of Tonkin "Incident," October Surprise, CIA-Contra Dark Alliance, Iran-Contra, WMDs and Iraq Invasion, and the overthrow of governments in Iran, Guatemala, Haiti, Chile, Greece, Indonesia, Panama, and many others. Outrageously, Berlet categorizes progressive intellectuals such as Peter Dale Scott, Michael Parenti, David Ray Griffin, Michel Chossudovsky, and by innuendo the two of us, as dangerous conspiracists. He uses a straw person technique by positing former LaRouche analyst Webster Tarpley, and the Church of God Evangelistic Association founder David J. Smith in the same category as the progressive intellectuals listed above. At the end of his essay, Berlet attempts to distinguish between people who do power structure research such as G. William Domhoff--who served on Peter Phillips' dissertation committee regarding the Bohemian Grove in 1994-- along with Holly Sklar, former PRA associate and author of a study on the Trilateral Commission compared to those who see elite networks as potential places of planning for self serving advantages. Of course, elites conspire to maximize their power and profits whenever possible. Corporate boardrooms are rife with such activity and the resulting actions/PR manipulations--as recently evidenced by British Petroleum. That does not mean one should simply dismiss researching the lies and manipulations of the powerful because it might imply a conspiracy, especially when the lies fail to explain how a 47-story steel frame building (WTC Building 7) collapsed in its own footprint at freefall speed on September 11, 2001, or how a scientific, peer-reviewed, academic journal discovered unreacted nano-thermite in the dust from the World Trade Centers (The Open Chemical Physics Journal). While we have solid respect for the long tradition of research into extreme right wing and racist organizations for which PRA is well known, we are most dismayed by Chip Berlet's reactionary dismissal of academic research into conspiracies/State Crimes Against Democracy by long time progressive intellectuals. Peter Phillips is a Professor of Sociology at Sonoma State University and President of Media Freedom Foundation/Project Censored Mickey Huff is an Associate Professor of History at Diablo Valley College and Director of Project Censored/Media Freedom Foundation See Berlet's essay "Toxic to Democracy" at <a href="http://www.publiceye.org/conspire/toxic2democracy/" rel="nofollow">http://www.publiceye.org/conspire/toxic2democracy/</a> ]]>

<![CDATA[Education is a wonderful thing, or is it: <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4djy7vSbd4" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4djy7vSbd4</a> New 911 Investigation? Forget about it. End 911 Fraud with THE DEFINING BET OF THE 21st CENTURY: Re-enact FLT77 Pentagon strike via MYTHBUSTERS remote controlled Low-density aluminum 727 into partial Pentagon mock-up 2:37 to test kinetic energy penetration along that highly reflective 40 degree angle of incidence thru C-Ring 3:07. I wager nothing at all would make it into the C-Ring. With only enter & exit walls, I'll even stand at General Quarters at 3:07...right next to the lever for the Toilet Cheney is standing in. Since yer Call bet means a 727 would make equivalent penetration...meaning Hi-density Depleted Uranium bunker buster missiles are unnecessary. Meaning Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine, Police should be using HOLLOW ALUMINUM BULLETS instead of copper & lead. Failing Sun Tzu: Moral Authority #1 constant factor of the victorious. Wherein, there are two National Security questions every 2008 presidential candidate needs to answer: WTC7 leaseholder Larry Silverstein in 2002 PBS documentary, "I remembered getting a call from the Fire Dept Commander," where the decision was made to "Just pull it!" It takes roughly a 20-30 man team 3-4 weeks to rig a 47 story building. 1st question is fill-in-the blank: WTC7 Evacuated.........9:OO AM Demolition team starts -:-- Demolition team finish -:-- WTC7 "Pulled"..........5:3O PM Some 2008 presidential candidates like Barack Obama claim to be weapons savvy stand-up poker players. OK fine, let's make this a $50 Million USD Texas Hold'em poker hand, with a chance for all the 2008 candidates to haul in some major cash and huge PR. Also at same time educate Bill Maher, O'Reilly, Savage, Penn, Teller, and sadly Stewart. All seated here at same table. If 911 Truthers are Loser-Retards who can't back up claims, then step up like a man each of you Debunker/Jokers and take this bet, OR ELSE JUST SAY WHAT YOU THINK WOULD HAPPEN. I'm All In...that's Call or Fold to you Barack, 3:10 Of course, within minutes the FBI confiscated all the Pentagon surveillance videos. And in 2004 the Air Traffic Control tapes were destroyed when news of the 911 NORAD Terror Drills on that day came out. FBI destruction of evidence, living their own RICO-profile, is why only experimental test can end 911 Fraud. MOTIVE for 911 Mil-Psych-Op stems directly from EPIC FAILURE of Reagan-Demo-Congress borrow-and-spend deal-with-the-devil now coming due. Neo-Con MOTIVE to create Scapegoat-PR for US govt insolvency in process. The Christian "Right" when presented with 911 evidence...and USD insolvency...have apparently decided: "That means we need someone like a Cheney to create the Scapegoat-PR...to snakecharm the media-freaking masses...so we can Pirate the oil fields...and fight the evil Islamic Jihadists!" Ok fine, problem is Christian "Right" has thereby allied itself with the "Wrong" Karma foretold in its own Operations Manual. There ye have Reagan-thru-Obama-and-beyond charting its fixed delusional state, the clinical definition of insanity: "We can't conduct business as usual and expect to survive!" Then doing exactly that. Alternative: Signing Statement 9/29/2009 Public Vote on Congressional Bills <a href="http://healthcare.change.org/actions/" rel="nofollow">http://healthcare.change.org/actions/</a>... Wherein Congress has the joint resolution OPTION now to put competing final Democratic vs final Republican versions of a bill to a public vote. Congress would have OPTION to put its competing versions of bill (including none of the above choice) to public vote. Said OPTION thereby generating a psychological restoring force. Re GROWTH: The "Greatest Stories Ever Told" of Jesus-Krishna-Buddah et al, are all variations on the same myth. <a href="http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/</a> All had virgin birth, star, 12 apostles, miracles, crucified, resurrection. However life is still a spiritual construct as founders of Quantum Mechanics concluded. Bohr: "There is no quantum world. Planck: "This mind is the matrix of all matter." The Universe is in partial a multi-personality matrix via: Vedanta "self-realization of cosmic consciousness." July 20, 2009 still necessary that evils have come, but just as such be ultimately self-destructive...makes all the more necessary they go at end of their appointed time. Present global financial technological dictatorship uses broken 2-party system to keep WE THE PEOPLE in adolescent state via media-generated Scapegoat psychological operations. OPTION's psychological return force redirects continuous campaign CASH FLOW, generating real human growth for the entire sorry lot, along the higher protocols of the more productive CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED. So there still be a HIGHER-POWER KARMA-JUSTICE...which will be much safer to be with than against. Otherwise they'll be coming for ya soon...just like for that Geithner-lookin player in "Ghost"...by PARANORMAL ACTIVITIES.]]>

<![CDATA[Once again, fans, get the Big Picture. The moment George W. Bush was appointed President of the United States of America by the U.S. Supreme Court, I knew war was coming, especially in Iraq. I did not know any details, but I was certain it was coming, sooner of later. No attack on New York was needed at all. W had a big vendetta left over from his father, Bush the First. He was going to have his war, you could bet that at the Bellagio, every dime you had. It was just a question of when, not if. W never needed September 11, he was going to have his war, no matter what. It was inevitable. Nothing was going to stop him. The whole thesis and major premise of Trutherism is that Bush W. needed the New York Mass Murders (why didn't people call them what they were?) to justify the war in Iraq. The facts of W's obsessed intention, no matter what, collapse that premise like a house of cards - hurricane! To those who claim W needed 9/11 to get his Iraq warI say nonsense. It was already a done deal, the moment he was in office. One, Saddam had violated, massively and repeatedly, flagrantly, every provsion of the ceasefire that had ended Gulf War I. Saddam was not anywhere remotely close to compliance with the letter and spirit of U.N. resolutions. Bush W. could have relaunched the war whenever he felt like it. And he was going to do so as soon as he was good and ready, with or without 9/11. Second, check out Noam Chomsky's "Manufactured Consent." Assuming Bish/Chneey even felt any need to justify a new war on Iraq at all, there are just a million less violent, nondestructive ways to beat the drums of war. He could have launched all kinds of campaigns in the news media (he didn't even need FOX!) and on Capitol Hill (even Democrats!) to get a conflict ignited. There were a million different ways, he didn't need a single American dead. Northwoods? Not at all necessary. Nobody has to fire a shot to get this war, just point to Saddam endlessly firing on our planes enforcing the old No Fly Zones. The nation would go along. Countless other ways too. Or, he could have simply ran his WMD game without any 9/11 at all. Saddam had fired them on Kurds and Iranians - no more needed. A false flag 9/11 would have ben utterly needless overkill. You could accomplish the same goals with far less risk and loss. In U.S. Special Forces Commandos (they know a thing or two about false flags and black ops!), the first rule a soldier is taught is, "Never take a risk that you don't have to take!" A 9/11 false flag would have massively violated this fundamental commando seecret armies rule. The same goes with the need for "security" against terrorsim. A million different ways to manufacture a threat if Bush wanted. None of them involve mass death. Morever, Department of Homeland Security? Bush, tightfisted GOP Conservative, did not even want this massive money sink Department at all, prior to 9/11, so why manufacture an excuse for a governmnet agency he did not desire to exist in the first place? Makes no sense! No, the primary motivations undergirding a supposed false flag operation simply do not exist here. This is why Noam Chomsky, who is probably America's greatest living expert on false flags and black ops, knows every detail of them, does not accept 9/11 was a false flag. Neither do I. Maverick]]>

<![CDATA[Here's a better question, Berkeley. Who cares? The man was a fungus on the face of this planet, and he deserved do die a horrible, painful death, just like anyone else who touches children and PAYS to get out of the charges. If he was murdered, whomever should do it should get a medal and a pat on the back. As far as I'm concerned, good riddance.]]>

<![CDATA[Top 5 Social Security Myths Myth #1: Social Security is going broke. Reality: There is no Social Security crisis. By 2023, Social Security will have a $4.6 trillion surplus (yes, trillion with a 'T'). It can pay out all scheduled benefits for the next quarter-century with no changes whatsoever.1 After 2037, it'll still be able to pay out 75% of scheduled benefits—and again, that's without any changes. The program started preparing for the Baby Boomers' retirement decades ago.2 Anyone who insists Social Security is broke probably wants to break it themselves. Myth #2: We have to raise the retirement age because people are living longer. Reality: This is a red-herring to trick you into agreeing to benefit cuts. Retirees are living about the same amount of time as they were in the 1930s. The reason average life expectancy is higher is mostly because many fewer people die as children than they did 70 years ago.3 What's more, what gains there have been are distributed very unevenly—since 1972, life expectancy increased by 6.5 years for workers in the top half of the income brackets, but by less than 2 years for those in the bottom half.4 But those intent on cutting Social Security love this argument because raising the retirement age is the same as an across-the-board benefit cut. Myth #3: Benefit cuts are the only way to fix Social Security. Reality: Social Security doesn't need to be fixed. But if we want to strengthen it, here's a better way: Make the rich pay their fair share. If the very rich paid taxes on all of their income, Social Security would be sustainable for decades to come.5 Right now, high earners only pay Social Security taxes on the first $106,000 of their income.6 But conservatives insist benefit cuts are the only way because they want to protect the super-rich from paying their fair share. Myth #4: The Social Security Trust Fund has been raided and is full of IOUs Reality: Not even close to true. The Social Security Trust Fund isn't full of IOUs, it's full of U.S. Treasury Bonds. And those bonds are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States.7 The reason Social Security holds only treasury bonds is the same reason many Americans do: The federal government has never missed a single interest payment on its debts. President Bush wanted to put Social Security funds in the stock market—which would have been disastrous—but luckily, he failed. So the trillions of dollars in the Social Security Trust Fund, which are separate from the regular budget, are as safe as can be. Myth #5: Social Security adds to the deficit Reality: It's not just wrong—it's impossible! By law, Social Security's funds are separate from the budget, and it must pay its own way. That means that Social Security can't add one penny to the deficit.8 Defeating these myths is the first step to stopping Social Security cuts. Can you share this list now? Sources: 1."To Deficit Hawks: We the People Know Best on Social Security," New Deal 2.0, June 14, 2010 <a href="http://www.moveon.org/r?r=89703&id=22141-4318377-lwUfYox&t=4" rel="nofollow">http://www.moveon.org/r?r=89703&id=22141-4318377-lwUfYox&t=4</a> 2. "The Straight Facts on Social Security," Economic Opportunity Institute, September 2009 <a href="http://www.moveon.org/r?r=89704&id=22141-4318377-lwUfYox&t=5" rel="nofollow">http://www.moveon.org/r?r=89704&id=22141-4318377-lwUfYox&t=5</a> 3. "Social Security and the Age of Retirement," Center for Economic and Policy Research, June 2010 <a href="http://www.moveon.org/r?r=89705&id=22141-4318377-lwUfYox&t=6" rel="nofollow">http://www.moveon.org/r?r=89705&id=22141-4318377-lwUfYox&t=6</a> 4. "More on raising the retirement age," Washington Post, July 8, 2010 <a href="http://www.moveon.org/r?r=89706&id=22141-4318377-lwUfYox&t=7" rel="nofollow">http://www.moveon.org/r?r=89706&id=22141-4318377-lwUfYox&t=7</a> 5. "Social Security is sustainable," Economic and Policy Institute, May 27, 2010 <a href="http://www.moveon.org/r?r=89707&id=22141-4318377-lwUfYox&t=8" rel="nofollow">http://www.moveon.org/r?r=89707&id=22141-4318377-lwUfYox&t=8</a> 6. "Maximum wage contribution and the amount for a credit in 2010," Social Security Administration, April 23, 2010 <a href="http://ssa-custhelp.ssa.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/240" rel="nofollow">http://ssa-custhelp.ssa.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/240</a> 7. "Trust Fund FAQs," Social Security Administration, February 18, 2010 <a href="http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/ProgData/fundFAQ.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/ProgData/fundFAQ.html</a> 8."To Deficit Hawks: We the People Know Best on Social Security," New Deal 2.0, June 14, 2010 <a href="http://www.moveon.org/r?r=89703&id=22141-4318377-lwUfYox&t=9" rel="nofollow">http://www.moveon.org/r?r=89703&id=22141-4318377-lwUfYox&t=9</a> ]]>

<![CDATA[!!]]>