I have lived in Ottawa, Toronto, Fort Erie, Montreal, Ste Agathe, St Jean, St Paul Mn and Arlington Va. Our world is amazing I wake up happy every day knowing I'll get to explore a little more of it.
Better sit down for this one. Given it's length it freezes on occasion at which time refresh and move the slider forward to the right spot in the movie.
This one invokes the memory and image of Quang Duc's statement.
You may think you are a highly refined individual capable of great intellectual feats, the reality is; you are a herd animal, that is intelligent and capable of great intellectual feats. The fact that you are a herd animal is important though. Your silence speaks volumes, it means that you agree and consent to what is happening. Do you really consent to what is happening? Do you agree with the way things are proceeding?
If not, embrace your inner cow!
Speak up!
Take Action!
Turn this herd around!
911 Truth groups have formed in almost every city in the world. Seek out yours and show up on the 11th of every month.
Our country, founded on the principles of liberty and independence, is no longer our country, but instead has been hijacked by a group of businessmen and businessmen who play politicians who trample over our civil liberties and sell our independence to the highest bidder, both foreign or domestic. Today, corporations, not the people, write our laws and leave the needs of the nation to waste while money is spent for bombs and bullets and concentration camps. Under the last two administrations, which were stolen wantonly and openly by the hijackers, Americans have seen their retirements funds stolen, the nation's treasure pillaged, their jobs outsourced, their infrustructure dismantled, and their country plunged into a never-ending war crafted by Machiavellian-Neocon minds controlling the White House. Congress, beholden to these interests, have shirked their duties to represent the people and have colluded with the hijackers by passing unconstitutional laws like the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, the John Warren Defense Appropriation Act, and countless others laws that will further erode our liberties and freedoms.
Isn't tax resistance the least we could do in light of all these injustices? When do we start expressing outrage (as well as freedom and bravery) by stopping the blood money spigot which is financing this rogue state? Just when do we decide to pull the plug on this illegal war that we were lied into and that has already killed over a million people? Just when do we stop paying our legislators who are actively working to destroy the U.S. Constitution? Just when do we stop funneling our tax dollars to be used to build concentration camps here in the United States for our own enslavement? Just when do we stop aiding and abetting torture?
At what point do we say enough is enough!?
These are the moral arguments to not pay federal taxes, but, for those of you who are worried that you are breaking the law by not paying the feds, rest assured that the very law itself says that you have no legal obligation to pay if you know that these money will be spent in the commission of a crime.
According to our legal system when a person kills someone in the process of committing a crime, his accomplice (who wasn't directly involved in the killing) would be just as guilty as his partner who pulled the trigger. It doesn't matter that the accomplice didn't actually do the killing or that he might have objected to the use of such violence, to the U.S. legal system he is just as liable for murder as his partner and would be charged with 1st or 2nd degree murder.
Here is the definition of an "accomplice" in the legal dictionary:
"One who knowingly, voluntarily, and with common intent unites with the principal offender in the commission of a crime. One who is in some way concerned or associated in commission of crime; partaker of guilt; one who aids or assists, or is an Accessory. One who is guilty of complicity in crime charged, either by being present and aiding or abetting in it, or having advised and encouraged it, though absent from place when it was committed, though mere presence, Acquiescence, or silence, in the absence of a duty to act, is not enough, no matter how reprehensible it may be, to constitute one an accomplice. One is liable as an accomplice to the crime of another if he or she gave assistance or encouragement or failed to perform a legal duty to prevent it with the intent thereby to promote or facilitate commission of the crime."
I don't think it gets anymore explicit than that. The law is unambiguous: If you knowingly give assistance or encouragement or failed to perform a legal duty to prevent the commission of a crime you are liable as an accomplice to that crime. So, when we send Federal taxes off to the state and and we know the money will be used on an illegal war and to pay torturers, and to destroy our Constitution, we are breaking the law and can be held accountable.
Once again, the law is unambiguous, you would be breaking the law by being an accomplice to a crime by paying your federal taxes.
Now, many tax resisters are using various constituional arguments to not pay taxes. Some use the excuse that the 16th Amendment was never ratified, therefore, it is null and void; others say that tax laws only stipulate paying taxes made on certain profits, but not on income derived from labor. There may be some validity to these argument but I believe that we need to take a moral stance similar to what Henry David Thoreau would have advocated in "Civil Disobedience." It's one thing to say that taxes are wrong because it wasn't codified or was misused in a legal document, and another to say that taxes are wrong because they are being used to commit morally reprehensible and illegal acts.
The added bonus to this moral/legal argument is that it is unimpeachable in its logic: One doesn't have to be a tax law/Constitution scholar to argue the "accomplice to a crime" defense.
Please obey the law and refuse to be an accomplice to a crime. Stop paying your federal taxes.
Look the "illuminati" didn't create the Niger forgeries (which were used to accuse Iraq of buying nuclear materials). Michael Ledeen did. The new world order didn't oust Plame (the CIA agent). Lewis Libby did. It you don't Know how to handle real facts and people with real names and faces. Then go play with your cult.'
This is a quote from the movie that I found interesting.
For those of you that want to climb into the rabbit hole and see how far Alice goes follow this Wink.
The new National Intelligence Estimate has come in and it seems that the Iranians have stopped their development of nuclear weapons thus removing the motivation for a preemptive strike on Iran by the United States.
The White House press are now grilling the George Bush's spokesperson Dana Perino; a new and welcome development. Does this mean that the media are going to stop publishing the lies that come from the White House without doing any analysis? Will the press start to look at things critically now? Perhaps.
These developments may be reason for hope, they may also be cause for greater concern. We need to recognize that there is a strong desire to attack Iran. These new developments do nothing to blunt this desire all they do is impede it. In order to regain the momentum to attack Iran a new false flag attack may be required.
While this sounds like good news, in reality the ante for this round has just been increased.
Charles Linbergh seems hopeful that the US can stay out of World War II. I guess he underestimated the desire to fabricate conditions for war. Below is a quote from the Wikipedia on the McCollum memo Pay special attention to the text in bullet #10.
It is not believed that in the present state of political opinion the United States government is capable of declaring war against Japan without more ado; and it is barely possible that vigorous action on our part might lead the Japanese to modify their attitude. Therefore, the following course of action is suggested:
* A. Make an arrangement with Britain for the use of British bases in the Pacific, particularly Singapore. * B. Make an arrangement with Holland for the use of base facilities and acquisition of supplies in the Dutch East Indies. * C. Give all possible aid to the Chinese government of Chiang-Kai-Shek. * D. Send a division of long range heavy cruisers to the Orient, Philippines, or Singapore. * E. Send two divisions of submarines to the Orient. * F. Keep the main strength of the U.S. fleet now in the Pacific in the vicinity of the Hawaiian Islands. * G. Insist that the Dutch refuse to grant Japanese demands for undue economic concessions, particularly oil. * H. Completely embargo all U.S. trade with Japan, in collaboration with a similar embargo imposed by the British Empire.
10. If by these means Japan could be led to commit an overt act of war, so much the better. At all events we must be fully prepared to accept the threat of war.
It has been asserted that the Americans knew about the Pearl Harbor attack in advance. Lieutenant Commander (LCDR) Arthur H. McCollum's memo shows that the Roosevelt Administration took actions to further provoke war with Japan. "If by these means Japan could be led to commit an overt act of war, so much the better."
Some people see war are a useful tool to achieve their political objectives. When faced with a reluctance to engage in war, fabricating conditions conducive to their objectives seems to be an acceptable practice. So how do you feel about being duped into the Global War of Terror?
Bill Maher has a television show. He made some rather rude comments about people in the 911 truth movement. Now they are protesting outside his studio and as this clip shows they have started to infiltrate his audience.
Norman Podhoretz is a neo-con and signed the PNAC documents. He is currently flogging his new book and advocating further escalation in the War of Terror. Watch the questions from the audience. It is good to see informed citizens.
"When I Came Home" is a documentary which follows the lives and struggles of several homeless veterans who have recently returned home from the war in Iraq.
End these wars. They were started because of a lie; nothing good can come from them.
Jaw dropping lecture on how the Education system has been transformed.
Those that are aware of 911 Truth and peak oil are frustrated by the level of denial that people exhibit. Ever wonder why people are like this? Cognitive dissidence is one possible explaination; where the pain of dealing with the truth is so bad that people will choose to believe in lies and live in denial.
Education plans that have been designed to reinforce compliance with group thought might be another reason.
Take a look at this video, it's well worth the time.
Top NATO generals meet in Canada to map Afghanistan strategy
OTTAWA (CP) — NATO's top generals have arrived in Canada for a meeting to map out strategy amid growing strain in the alliance over the increasingly bloody war in Afghanistan.
Last week Defence Minister Peter MacKay said Canada's current mission in its current "configuration" will be over in 2009.
Pellerin said that could mean simply pulling out the infantry battle group, but leaving behind support elements such as artillery and logistics.
"The other option which I hear also is that the government would pull out completely from Kandahar," said Pellerin.
"I guess we'll hear more in the throne speech, but pulling out of Kandahar with the excuse that we've taken our casualties, done the heavy-lifting, it's now time for somebody else to me is not a very mature option."
Canada will be pulling out of the Afghanistan mission because new evidence has come to light. While distasteful the Taliban are not responsible for the events of September 11th. America is a liar and has proven that she cannot be trusted. She has fabricated stories to justify the invasion of two nations and starting a Global War of Terror. Canada trusted America and sent troops to Afghanistan to support her in a time of need. Now that we know she lied we are morally obligated to end this engagement. In light of the new evidence that is readily available on the internet Canada should also apologize to the people of Afghanistan; engaging in criminal acts of aggression is not something that the people of Canada or their Government will support.
While I like this video, unfortunately it will automatically play which is problematic if you load this page a few times to review the other material. The best suggestion I have is to use the pause button on the lower left hand side of this video.
This article on the Iraq War from The Nation is rather eye opening. It is eleven pages of first hand accounts. Soldiers that have been there and are willing to state what they experienced are now coming forward. It is important that we listen to them and understand how our political will has manifested itself.
OTTAWA — The Harper government has been told to stop referring to “fighting terrorism” and the Sept. 11 attacks, and to banish the phrase “cut and run” from its vocabulary if it is to persuade a skeptical public that the military mission in Afghanistan is worth pursuing.
A public-opinion report says only 40 per cent of respondents across Canada, and almost none in Quebec, support the deployment. To change the perceptions, it recommends putting the emphasis on “rebuilding,” “enhancing the lives of women and children,” and “peacekeeping.”
ALAN FREEMAN From Friday's Globe and Mail July 13, 2007 at 1:12 AM EDT
That is exactly what I want my troops doing. I believe in my troops and I know they want to help people. They should be digging wells, building roads, school houses and focusing their energies on helping people.
We all know that Osama Bin Laden did not bring down the towers on September 11 which means a lie started the war in Afghanistan. Chasing terrorists and hunting people is a continuation of this lie. Our troops are committed to Afghanistan for some time to come but that doesn't mean we have to continue the same failed policies. In World War II our troops were send over the lines at night, with lights shining behind them. The silouettes that they cast made them easy picking for the Germans that night. How many times do you think we had to do that before we turned off the lights?
We must eliminate the secrecy and the Canadian public has a responsibility to ask questions about how the mission is proceeding, on a regular basis. We sent our troops into Somalia with American leadership. America's "brute force first" approach escalates the situation and makes matters worse. As a result of the Somalia Affair we disbanded the Canadian Airborne Regiment and the military suffered for years. So lets not forget that Canadians expect their armed forces to conduct themselves properly while on deployments.
We need to discuss any recommitments of our troops to this conflict in light of the discoveries related to 911. We invaded Afghanistan on trumped up charges without UN approval which may make this an illegal war of agression.
Mr Harper if you want to do something positive; lead a trade mission to Afghanistan and find ways for these people to earn a living on legal trade goods.
The Coalition to Impeach Vice President Dick Cheney
Public Statement of Vice President Richard Cheney: "[Since September 11] We learned more and more that there was a relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda that stretched back through most of the decade of the '90s, that it involved training, for example, on BW and CW, that al-Qaeda sent personnel to Baghdad to get trained on the systems that are involved. The Iraqis providing bomb-making expertise and advice to the al-Qaeda organization." Source: Meet the Press, NBC (9/14/2003).
H. Res. 333: Impeaching Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors
HRES 333 IH
110th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. RES. 333
Impeaching Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
April 24, 2007
Mr. KUCINICH submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
RESOLUTION
Impeaching Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors.
Resolved, That Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate:
Articles of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives of the United States of America in the name of itself and of the people of the United States of America, against Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States of America, in maintenance and support of its impeachment against him for high crimes and misdemeanors.
Article I
In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States by fabricating a threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to justify the use of the United States Armed Forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security interests, to wit:
(1) Despite all evidence to the contrary, the Vice President actively and systematically sought to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States about an alleged threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction:
(A) `We know they have biological and chemical weapons.' March 17, 2002, Press Conference by Vice President Dick Cheney and His Highness Salman bin Hamad Al Khalifa, Crown Prince of Bahrain at Shaikh Hamad Palace.
(B) `. . . and we know they are pursuing nuclear weapons.' March 19, 2002, Press Briefing by Vice President Dick Cheney and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in Jerusalem.
(C) `And he is actively pursuing nuclear weapons at this time . . .' March 24, 2002, CNN Late Edition interview with Vice President Cheney.
(D) `We know he's got chemicals and biological and we know he's working on nuclear.' May 19, 2002, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.
(E) `But we now know that Saddam has resumed his efforts to acquire nuclear weapons . . . Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt that he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us.' August 26, 2002, Speech of Vice President Cheney at VFW 103rd National Convention.
(F) `Based on intelligence that's becoming available, some of it has been made public, more of it hopefully will be, that he has indeed stepped up his capacity to produce and deliver biological weapons, that he has reconstituted his nuclear program to develop a nuclear weapon, that there are efforts under way inside Iraq to significantly expand his capability.' September 8, 2002, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.
(G) `He is, in fact, actively and aggressively seeking to acquire nuclear weapons.' September 8, 2002, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.
(H) `And we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.' March 16, 2003, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.
(2) Preceding the March 2003 invasion of Iraq the Vice President was fully informed that no legitimate evidence existed of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The Vice President pressured the intelligence community to change their findings to enable the deception of the citizens and Congress of the United States.
(A) Vice President Cheney and his Chief of Staff, Lewis Libby, made multiple trips to the CIA in 2002 to question analysts studying Iraq's weapons programs and alleged links to al Qaeda, creating an environment in which analysts felt they were being pressured to make their assessments fit with the Bush administration's policy objectives accounts.
(B) Vice President Cheney sought out unverified and ultimately inaccurate raw intelligence to prove his preconceived beliefs. This strategy of cherry picking was employed to influence the interpretation of the intelligence.
(3) The Vice President's actions corrupted or attempted to corrupt the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate, an intelligence document issued on October 1, 2002, and carefully considered by Congress prior to the October 10, 2002, vote to authorize the use of force. The Vice President's actions prevented the necessary reconciliation of facts for the National Intelligence Estimate which resulted in a high number of dissenting opinions from technical experts in two Federal agencies.
(A) The State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research dissenting view in the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate stated `Lacking persuasive evidence that Baghdad has launched a coherent effort to reconstitute it's nuclear weapons program INR is unwilling to speculate that such an effort began soon after the departure of UN inspectors or to project a timeline for the completion of activities it does not now see happening. As a result INR is unable to predict that Iraq could acquire a nuclear device or weapon.'.
(B) The State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research dissenting view in the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate also stated that `Finally, the claims of Iraqi pursuit of natural uranium in Africa are, in INR's assessment, highly dubious.'.
(C) The State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research dissenting view in the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate references a Department of Energy opinion by stating that `INR accepts the judgment of technical experts at the US Department of Energy (DOE) who have concluded that the tubes Iraq seeks to acquire are poorly suited for use in gas centrifuges to be used for uranium enrichment and finds unpersuasive the arguments advanced by others to make the case that they are intended for that purpose.'.
The Vice President subverted the national security interests of the United States by setting the stage for the loss of more than 3300 United States service members; the loss of 650,000 Iraqi citizens since the United States invasion; the loss of approximately $500 billion in war costs which has increased our Federal debt; the loss of military readiness within the United States Armed Services due to overextension, lack of training and lack of equipment; the loss of United States credibility in world affairs; and the decades of likely blowback created by the invasion of Iraq.
In all of this, Vice President Richard B. Cheney has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore, Vice President Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.
Article II
In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States about an alleged relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda in order to justify the use of the United States Armed Forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security interests, to wit:
(1) Despite all evidence to the contrary, the Vice President actively and systematically sought to deceive the citizens and the Congress of the United States about an alleged relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda:
(A) `His regime has had high-level contacts with Al Qaeda going back a decade and has provided training to Al Qaeda terrorists.' December 2, 2002, Speech of Vice President Cheney at the Air National Guard Senior Leadership Conference.
(B) `His regime aids and protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaeda. He could decide secretly to provide weapons of mass destruction to terrorists for use against us.' January 30, 2003, Speech of Vice President Cheney to 30th Political Action Conference in Arlington, Virginia.
(C) `We know he's out trying once again to produce nuclear weapons and we know that he has a long-standing relationship with various terrorist groups, including the Al Qaeda organization.' March 16, 2003, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.
(D) `We learned more and more that there was a relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda that stretched back through most of the decade of the '90s, that it involved training, for example, on biological weapons and chemical weapons . . .' September 14, 2003, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.
(E) `Al Qaeda had a base of operation there up in Northeastern Iraq where they ran a large poisons factory for attacks against Europeans and U.S. forces.' October 3, 2003, Speech of Vice President Cheney at Bush-Cheney '04 Fundraiser in Iowa.
(F) `He also had an established relationship with Al Qaeda providing training to Al Qaeda members in areas of poisons, gases, and conventional bombs.' October 10, 2003, Speech of Vice President Cheney to the Heritage Foundation.
(G) `Al Qaeda and the Iraqi intelligence services have worked together on a number of occasions.' January 9, 2004, Rocky Mountain News interview with Vice President Cheney.
(H) `I think there's overwhelming evidence that there was a connection between Al Qaeda and the Iraqi government.' January 22, 2004, NPR: Morning Edition interview with Vice President Cheney.
(I) `First of all, on the question of--of whether or not there was any kind of relationship, there clearly was a relationship. It's been testified to; the evidence is overwhelming.' June 17, 2004, CNBC: Capital Report interview with Vice President Cheney.
(2) Preceding the March 2003 invasion of Iraq the Vice President was fully informed that no credible evidence existed of a working relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda, a fact articulated in several official documents, including:
(A) A classified Presidential Daily Briefing ten days after the September 11, 2001, attacks indicating that the United States intelligence community had no evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the September 11th attacks and that there was `scant credible evidence that Iraq had any significant collaborative ties with Al Qaeda'.
(B) Defense Intelligence Terrorism Summary No. 044-02, issued in February 2002 by the United States Defense Intelligence Agency, which challenged the credibility of information gleaned from captured al Qaeda leader al-Libi. The DIA report also cast significant doubt on the possibility of a Saddam Hussein-al-Qaeda conspiracy: `Saddam's regime is intensely secular and is wary of Islamic revolutionary movements. Moreover, Baghdad is unlikely to provide assistance to a group it cannot control.'.
(C) A January 2003 British intelligence classified report on Iraq that concluded that `there are no current links between the Iraqi regime and the al-Qaeda network'.
The Vice President subverted the national security interests of the United States by setting the stage for the loss of more than 3,300 United States service members; the loss of 650,000 Iraqi citizens since the United States invasion; the loss of approximately $500 billion in war costs which has increased our Federal debt; the loss of military readiness within the United States Armed Services due to overextension, lack of training and lack of equipment; the loss of United States credibility in world affairs; and the decades of likely blowback created by the invasion of Iraq.
In all of this, Vice President Richard B. Cheney has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
Wherefore, Vice President Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.
Article III
In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has openly threatened aggression against the Republic of Iran absent any real threat to the United States, and done so with the United States proven capability to carry out such threats, thus undermining the national security of the United States, to wit:
(1) Despite no evidence that Iran has the intention or the capability of attacking the United States and despite the turmoil created by United States invasion of Iraq, the Vice President has openly threatened aggression against Iran as evidenced by the following:
(A) `For our part, the United States is keeping all options on the table in addressing the irresponsible conduct of the regime. And we join other nations in sending that regime a clear message: We will not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon.' March 7, 2006, Speech of Vice President Cheney to American Israel Public Affairs Committee 2006 Policy Conference.
(B) `But we've also made it clear that all options are on the table.' January 24, 2007, CNN Situation Room interview with Vice President Cheney.
(C) `When we--as the President did, for example, recently--deploy another aircraft carrier task force to the Gulf, that sends a very strong signal to everybody in the region that the United States is here to stay, that we clearly have significant capabilities, and that we are working with friends and allies as well as the international organizations to deal with the Iranian threat.' January 29, 2007, Newsweek interview with Vice President Cheney.
(D) `But I've also made the point and the President has made the point that all options are still on the table.' February 24, 2007, Vice President Cheney at Press Briefing with Australian Prime Minister in Sydney, Australia.
(2) The Vice President, who repeatedly and falsely claimed to have had specific, detailed knowledge of Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction capabilities, is no doubt fully aware of evidence that demonstrates Iran poses no real threat to the United States as evidenced by the following:
(A) `I know that what we see in Iran right now is not the industrial capacity you can [use to develop a] bomb.' Mohamed ElBaradei, Director General of International Atomic Energy Agency, February 19, 2007.
(B) Iran indicated its `full readiness and willingness to negotiate on the modality for the resolution of the outstanding issues with the IAEA, subject to the assurances for dealing with the issues in the framework of the Agency, without the interference of the United Nations Security Council'. IAEA Board Report, February 22, 2007.
(C) `. . . so whatever they have, what we have seen today, is not the kind of capacity that would enable them to make bombs.' Mohamed El Baradei, Director General of International Atomic Energy Agency, February 19, 2007.
(3) The Vice President is fully aware of the actions taken by the United States towards Iran that are further destabilizing the world as evidenced by the following:
(A) The United States has refused to engage in meaningful diplomatic relations with Iran since 2002, rebuffing both bilateral and multilateral offers to dialogue.
(B) The United States is currently engaged in a military buildup in the Middle East that includes the increased presence of the United States Navy in the waters near Iran, significant United States Armed Forces in two nations neighboring to Iran, and the installation of anti-missile technology in the region.
(C) News accounts have indicated that military planners have considered the B61-11, a tactical nuclear weapon, as one of the options to strike underground bunkers in Iran.
(D) The United States has been linked to anti-Iranian organizations that are attempting to destabilize the Iranian government, in particular the Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK), even though the state department has branded it a terrorist organization.
(E) News accounts indicate that United States troops have been ordered into Iran to collect data and establish contact with anti-government groups.
(4) In the last three years the Vice President has repeatedly threatened Iran. However, the Vice President is legally bound by the U.S. Constitution's adherence to international law that prohibits threats of use of force.
(A) Article VI of the United States Constitution states, `This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land.' Any provision of an international treaty ratified by the United States becomes the law of the United States.
(B) The United States is a signatory to the United Nations Charter, a treaty among the nations of the world. Article II, Section 4 of the United Nations Charter states, `All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.' The threat of force is illegal.
(C) Article 51 lays out the only exception, `Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.' Iran has not attacked the United States; therefore any threat against Iran by the United States is illegal.
The Vice President's deception upon the citizens and Congress of the United States that enabled the failed United States invasion of Iraq forcibly altered the rules of diplomacy such that the Vice President's recent belligerent actions towards Iran are destabilizing and counterproductive to the national security of the United States.
In all of this, Vice President Richard B. Cheney has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
Wherefore Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
It's been a few years now and even with a couple hundred thousand armed weapons inspectors no weapons of mass destruction have been found. Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice seemed to be quite sure about the fact that Iraq had these weapons just before the invasion. I wonder what they were saying before September 11, 2001?
Luckily we have John Pilger, he does some great documentaries. John has put together this little clip. Just stunning how Colin and Condoleezza can lie in such a blatant manner.
Confronting the Evidence: A Call to Reopen the 9/11 Investigation
People are investigating September 11th, 2001. Many of these people are respectable professionals. These people are getting together and publishing their results. The following video is one such example.
If you really want to know what happened on September 11, 2001 then this video is a must see.
Everyone remembers where they were when they found out the towers were hit. Everyone remembers what they were doing. Do you remember what the eye witnesses said, did and experienced?
DO YOU REMEMBER?
Hit play. Revisit the day, listen to the eye witnesses and remember.
In an article about the Battle of Gaza we find a new front in the war opening up. The previous Government in Gaza was supported externally. Hamas; the party that took control of the government by electoral victory have had to come back and retake control by force of arms.
The war in Iraq keeps getting worse. The Golden Dome Mosque has been hit again.
The war in Afghanistan in escalating and NATO is warning of "image problems" related to their killing Afghan civilians.
The one bright spot is that talk of war in Iran is still just talk. The only question in this case is whether we will be able to stop the Global War on Terror before or after Iran is attacked.
To all the fathers our there on this fathers day: I observe Red Fridays only thing is that I call it a blood soaked rag in case anyone forgets why we are wearing them. I think we should bring you all home, now.
After watching this movie I just had to bookmark it. A single actor plays a schizophrenic that has figured it all out. He knows who was behind 911 and why they did it. His tin foil hat wearing self made me laugh on so many occasions. At times this movie is really funny. He names a lot of names but who knows if what he says is true.
This documentary closely studies a few details that many of the other 911 documentaries breeze over. This allows the viewer to really think about these oft forgotten details and presents some rather striking conclusions.
