Wednesday, 31 October 2007
Ex-FBI Translator Sibel Edmonds Says She is Ready to "Spill the Beans" on Acts of Treason Committed by US Officials in Relation to the 911 Attacks.
Remember the exclusive story you aired on Sibel Edmonds, originally on October 27th, 2002, when she was not allowed to tell you everything that she heard while serving as an FBI translator after 9/11 because she was gagged by the rarely-invoked "States Secret Privilege"? Well, she's still gagged. In fact, as the ACLU first described her, she's "the most gagged person in the history of the United States of America."
But if you'll sit down and talk with her for an unedited interview, she has now told The BRAD BLOG during an exclusive interview, she will now tell you everything she knows.
Everything she hasn't been allowed to tell since 2002, about the criminal penetration of the FBI where she worked, and at the Departments of State and Defense; everything she heard concerning the corruption and illegal activities of several well-known members of Congress; everything she's aware of concerning information omitted and/or covered up in relation to 9/11. All of the information gleaned from her time listening to and translating wire-taps made prior to 9/11 at the FBI.
Sibel Edmonds has stated that her legal lines of appeal against the gag order (the cover-up) have been exhausted. Members of Congress who have promised to act on her information- information that has been confirmed as accurate- have done nothing.
This is about exposing criminals and seeking justice. If Sibel cannot get Congress to act or have the mainstream media to air her story, then she MUST release a recorded interview on the internet in order to get the information out in the open.
Her information about the 911 attacks may very well bring a stop to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan -perhaps bringing down the current US Administration.
Tuesday, 30 October 2007
by Dr. David Ray Griffin
The 911 Commission Report claims to have conducted a thorough investigation into the September 11 attacks but this is not true. Upon inspection we can clearly see the Report is a fraud built on numerous omissions and distortions. There are so many lies contained in the report that any reasonable person must conclude there is a cover-up in process.
Dr Griffin's article is a MUST READ for those who are just discovering the problems with the official narrative into 911.
Monday, 29 October 2007
Sunday, 28 October 2007
A few guys at Minot "inexplicably" screwed up and loaded the nukes and then there were a chain of mistakes because no one else treated the nuclear-tipped missiles as if they were armed with nuclear weapons.
The trouble with this theory, or story line if you will, is that while nobody at Minot, supposedly, noticed what was happening-even though ground crew workers spent eight hours laboring to get the pod with the six nuke-tipped missiles mounted on the plane's wing. This despite the warheads are clearly visible and identifiable by the silver coating they exhibit when viewed through a little window in each nosecone cover, and because there are red coverings on the nuke nosecones-once the plane got to Barksdale, the ground crew there, which had no reason on earth to suspect it was looking at nuclear warheads, spotted them immediately upon going to the plane.
I am posting this story in light of the fact that 911 was an inside Job.
We should be extremely worried at attempts to initiate another war against Iran- especially if the protagonists plan on using a nuke. Questions still remain as to whether 6 nukes were recovered at Berksdale as opposed to 5. I can only hope that all the weapons were accounted for.
This is why arresting Bush, Cheney and others for their crimes against Iraq (or as suspects in the 911 attacks) is vital in preventing further bloodshed.
The polling, conducted by the Program on International Policy (PIPA) at the University of Maryland and Knowledge Networks, also reveals that the frequency of these misperceptions varies significantly according to individuals’ primary source of news. Those who primarily watch Fox News are significantly more likely to have misperceptions, while those who primarily listen to NPR or watch PBS are significantly less likely.
If you look at the polling statistics for other major US news services like CBS and ABC you can see that viewers of these networks also have a significant level of misperception about the Iraq war.
This is a big part of the problem with the US "democracy" at the moment -the corporate media consistently dishing out White House lies with no real contextual analysis.
The US media has rarely called to account statements made by the Bush Administration over Iraq and a similar pattern is emerging with Iran. As a result the people are being fed a diet of distorted news and propaganda allowing them to support all manner of misadventures. Thankfully many people are beginning to realise that what they have been told has not been the truth. The "lie bubble" is rapidly deflating. Let's hope there is greater resistance to bombing Iran than there was with invading Iraq.
(Please note: I do realise many Americans were very strongly against the Iraq War. The trick is to get the rest of the population on the same page - as many as possible- so that the media lies, and the war mongering politicians can be stopped.)
The Senators involved in pushing the new Iran sanctions see every Middle East country (barring Israel) as a threat. They have ticked off Iraq and now they are looking to go after Iran.
Exposing their actions is vital in stopping further genocidal attacks.
Why should US leaders (or anyone for that matter) be given a free ride in terms of their questionable actions ? We need to see these people held to account. We need to seek a measure of justice for those who have been, and continue to be, killed or injured without good cause.
Where is the mainstream media on all this ? We keep hearing claims from the White House about how Iran has supplied EFP devices to the Iraqis but we never hear that these accusations are baseless.
One might assume that the mainstream have betrayed its audience with the unqualified regurgitation of such lies. There is nothing tricky about accessing the information about Iraqi EFP manufacture. The media here is either incompetent or corrupt.
It's only a matter of time before the markets tank.
As the housing fuelled economies falter there with be diminished profits and losses appearing on the books of various publicly listed companies. Already many banks involved in the sub-prime loan mess have taken a massive hit (Merrill Lynch) while others have been saved from bankruptcy thanks to billion dollar Federal reserve bailouts. The fundamentals do not look good.
Saturday, 27 October 2007
Thursday, 25 October 2007
The veteran investor, who predicted the 1999 commodities rally, also said he was still bullish about surging Chinese stock markets despite worries over a bubble.
Fears are growing over the health of the U.S. economy after the fallout from the subprime mortgage market crisis and the global credit crunch it triggered.
The U.S. Federal Reserve has already slashed borrowing costs by 50 basis points to 4.75 percent to try and shore up the world's biggest economy and is widely expected to lower interest rates again next week.
"The US economy is undoubtedly in recession," Rogers told the Telegraph in Hong Kong in an article published on its Website.
"Many parts of industry are actually in a state worse than recession. If it were not for (Federal Reserve Chairman Ben) Bernanke putting huge amounts of money into the market, the stock market would probably be down much more than it is."
Rogers, who co-founded the Quantum Fund with billionaire investor George Soros in the 1970s, said it made sense to desert the dollar.
"All other things being equal during the next six months, that's the way I will go," he said. "But if the Swiss franc goes through the roof, I probably won't put money into the Swiss franc."
And he dismissed worries for now that surging Chinese equities had formed a bubble.
The Shanghai Composite Index (^SSEC - News) settled 1.2 percent higher on Wednesday at 5,843 points. This time last year the index was trading around 1,800 points.
"It's not a bubble yet -- if it goes past 9,000 in January I'll have to sell. Bubbles always end badly," he said. "I do not want to sell Chinese stocks. I want to own them forever and I want my
UPDATE: Architects and Engineers For 911 Truth- More than 200* Building Experts say 911 was an Inside Job
More than Two Hundred building experts now say that the attacks on the World Trade Centre were an inside job. The number of experts supporting the "Inside Job" hypothesis increases by the day. The reason for this is clear: the science demonstrating this fact is irrefutable.
The official lies about 911 cannot be allowed to stand. Exposing the truth is necessary to stop any further staged attacks that could be used as an excuse to clamp down on US freedoms and possibly to launch a new War verses Iran. We live in dangerous times and we need experts like these to help fight against the lies. The analysis provided by these Architects and Engineers MUST be used by honourable Law Enforcement, Judicial and Military persons in actions against the real suspects. Don't let them get away with murder !
Wednesday, 24 October 2007
At a meeting with reporters last week, President Bush said that "if you're interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing [Iran] from having the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon." These were not the barbs of some neoconservative crank or sidelined politician looking for publicity. This was the president of the United States, invoking the specter of World War III if Iran gained even the knowledge needed to make a nuclear weapon.
The American discussion about Iran has lost all connection to reality. Norman Podhoretz, the neoconservative ideologist whom Bush has consulted on this topic, has written that Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is "like Hitler … a revolutionary whose objective is to overturn the going international system and to replace it in the fullness of time with a new order dominated by Iran and ruled by the religio-political culture of Islamofascism." For this staggering proposition Podhoretz provides not a scintilla of evidence.
This is a MUST READ Article.
The author is right on the money. The claims made by neoconservative members of the Bush Administration and their supporters are insane. They will say and do anything in order to have a war against Iran.
These people are dangerous and need to be stopped. Agents of the US Judicial, Legislative, Military or Law Enforcement branches need to arrest key members of the Administration NOW for the crimes already committed in their War against Iraq. I don't mean the advisors, I mean those who have command responsiblity for the illegal invasion of Iraq and those who authorised torture (Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld et al). Ultimately these people okayed the criminal operations and need to be held accountable. If nothing is done an unnecessary War against Iran will be right around the corner.
(thanks to Tired for the link !)
The pic above shows CNN host Glen Beck.
The War against the mainstream media is well and truly on and it's a war worth fighting. At stake is access to the truth about what is really going on in our world. This is important since accepting a world built upon lies has serious consequences for all of us. For example: politicians will get away with gratuitous lies in order to launch unnecessary wars for special interest groups that kill thousands (Iraq).
Although major progress against corporate media propaganda (lies) has occurred mostly within the online community I fully expect the rest of the population to become informed about 911 in the near future as almost everyone uses a computer for news these days. A big factor at play is that the mainstream lies about 911 are too weak to stand up to much scrutiny and that's why their censorship will eventually fail.
(see also the link below for more on this story.)
Mr Beck obviously has no clue. It was interesting to see that the guests he invited to push his claim were both debunking chumps.
The "Skeptic" Michael Shermer stated that the World Trade Centre collapses exhibited none of the features of a demolition. He is wrong. All the building collapses displayed features of controlled demolition and WTC 7 exhibited ALL the features of a classic controlled demolition (see here). The man was either ignorant or is deliberately LYING.
James Meigs from Popular Mechanics, the other guest, made the claim that the evidence against the 911 "truthers" was overwhelming whereas the opposite is true. The official story is simply not supported by the evidence. Once again this guy is either grossly ignorant or is a LIAR.
I'd like to see CNN invite Professor Steven Jones or David Ray Griffin onto the show for an honest debate about the 911 physical evidence.
Just last week, NASA ordered the contractor that conducted the survey to purge all related data from its computers.
Tuesday, 23 October 2007
Humans are extremely successful animals. Apart from ourselves, meteors, volcanoes and earthquakes there is very little to threaten our continued population expansion. Eventually something has to give- our planet will not be able to support an infinite number of energy hungry humans.
Some sort of plan needs to be worked out !
Monday, 22 October 2007
There are severe consequences for distorting information and lying to the public. By acting as a mouth piece for the Bush Administration Fox led the way in supporting the War in Iraq. Rather than acting responsibly and skeptically in regard to the White House claims about Iraqi WMDs, which were shown to be unsupported (lies) in other sections of the media (independent & online news services), executives at Fox chose to push only one side of the story. Fair and Balanced they were not.
Unfortunately we have already had one war in which thousands have died and it looks like we may be getting another against Iran in the very near future. Dick Cheney has been claiming the US is facing a threat from Iran whereas the IAEA and many world leaders including Vladimir Putin of Russia contend that the Iranians are only building a power station.
Thankfully most people have come to realise how bad Rupert Murdoch's Fox "News" channel is in terms of relating honest information and are more skeptical this time around. AS for the rest of the US Corporate News Networks, they must report accurately on these events so as to avert another senseless war. No more cheerleading !
The executives in the corporate media need to get a grip and think about what the hell they are doing -they have blood on their hands.
The US economy is in a fix. The subprime disaster is not over and the problems associated with that fiasco are more widespread than has been admitted. The specter of bad credit and a slowing economy continues to affect financial markets, worse than in Europe or the Asia Pacific region.
To keep the stock market pumped up (put on artificial life support) the US Federal Reserve has resorted to generating more cheap money through lowering interest rates and by bailing out failed banks. However, the problems with the economy have not been resolved and the lower interest rates, and the flood of US dollars into failed financial vehicles, are only causing the dollar to weaken. This increases the cost of imported goods and materials, contributing to inflation.
It's catch 22. To save Wall Street they need lots of cheap money pumped into the machine. But in saving the top end businesses they risk what is occurring now- a weakening of the purchasing power of the dollar. This impacts on world money markets and trading positions. The Europeans are not happy about this and recognise the risk of the weak dollar. As usual the US is trying to hide this reality. How typical !
Things will not get any better in the short to medium term. Let's just hope we don't see any hyperinflation in the US. Middle and Low income earners will be devastated in this event.
Saturday, 20 October 2007
The picture above shows MOLTEN STEEL being removed from the World Trade Centre rubble pile. However, from all accounts (even the official NISTs report concedes this point) the fires in the WTC buildings were too weak to cause such melting. Conventional building fires, including ones initiated with aviation kerosene, cannot raise the temperature of structural steel to its melting point of around 1300 degrees celsius. According to all the available data, the fires in the Towers could only have reached a maximum temperature of around 650 degrees celsius- yet here we can see steel so hot that it has taken on a yellow look (revealing a temperature of between 850-1000 degrees celsius !!).
There are only two ways which would enable this steel to reach such a high temperature.
1. In a blast furnace.
2. From Explosives.
The rubble pile was not a blast furnace.
Therefore one must assume that explosives were the most likely agent.
Furthermore, we have supporting eyewitness testimony from firefighters and civilians which reveals that many of them felt, and were knocked over by, huge explosions occurring in the lower floors of the WTC buildings -far away from the fire zones.
Recent analysis conducted by physics Professor Steven Jones has now uncovered the chemical signature for the explosive THERMATE in multiple samples taken from the WTC steel and dust- proving, without doubt, that explosives were used. The newly formed, Architects for 911 Truth organisation, with over 160 building professionals onboard, concurs with these findings.
The science here is clear cut. Whatever one thinks about the various theories floating around out there, one thing is certain: The Twin Towers (and Building 7) at the World Trade Centre site were rigged with explosives.
At the very least, part of the 911 attacks against the World Trade Centre complex MUST have been an "Inside Job" as Bin Laden's men could not have gained the necessary access to wire these buildings.
The charade must end. If we are honest with ourselves we must now seriously consider ALL the evidence-- including material which indicates the complicity of certain elements within the US government in the attacks of September 11. A new independent criminal investigation must be launched.
In a bleak warning, the IMF found that homes in Britain were overpriced by up to 40 per cent — far more than the overpricing in the US before the current property slump began there. The finding will fuel fears over housing market prospects after growing evidence recently that prices have already begun to fall in some parts of Britain.
And how many of the UK home loans are bad such that the occupants will have to default on their debt ?
In the US lenders would give money to anyone and their dog, so the question is how far did the mortgage lenders go down this path in Britain ? It will not be a simple matter of overpriced housing, there will a number of other consequences to this bubble.
Please remember that the subprime disaster in the US is set to deteriorate. The house price slump in the UK and other parts of Europe (see the link) will only make things worse. These are not encouraging factors for the global economy and stock markets in general. An economic downturn is in the works.
That's a lot of bases.
It is not new news either (see here)- it does, however, sound like confirmation of the plans we knew about back in 2004. Take note of the work being undertaken on the $593 million dollar American Embassy in Baghdad. The biggest, most fortified Embassy in the world. The US has no plans for leaving Iraq anytime soon despite all the talk we are hearing from the politicians (with the notable exceptions of Ron Paul & Denis Kucinich !).
Wednesday, 17 October 2007
National Institute for Standards and Technology Admits it is Unable to Explain the Total Collapse Of the Twin Towers
A 10,000 page scientific study only offers theories as to how the "collapse initiation" proceeded and fails to address how it was possible for part of a WTC structure to fall through the path of most resistance at freefall speed, completely violating the accepted laws of physics.
The NIST letter is a joke. They claim the observable data supports their findings but this is clearly not true. Some of the data, cited in their own report, actually contradicts their claims. They claim fire temperatures reached 1000 degrees Celsius, and caused the floors to sag helping to collapse the buildings. This claim is contradicted in their report by data which shows the fires were weak and could have only reached up to 600 degrees. They are making stuff up. In the letter they simply declare that there is nothing wrong with their study and there is no need to change it.
In summary we have information on record against the NIST claims that clearly show:
there was no sign of 1000 degree fires,
no sign of excessive floor sagging,
no evidence of severe damage to the building's core structure,
that there were plenty of witnesses to large explosions in the lower levels of the Towers,
and that the NIST computer simulations of the building damage must remain in question since they refuse to release their modelling data.
The original NIST Report, that the recent letter defends, is an out and out fraud. As Kevin Barrett from Scholar for 911 Truth points out:
"NIST'S 10,000-page report purports to explain what it calls "collapse initiation" -- the loss of several floors' vertical support. In order to dream up this preposterous scenario, NIST had to ignore its own tests that showed that virtually none of the steel got hotter than 500 degrees f. It had to claim that somehow the planes took out many core columns, despite the fact that only a direct hit by an engine would have been likely to do so, and that the chances of this happening even once are fairly low. It had to preposterously allege that the plane that nicked the corner of the South Tower took out more core columns than the one that hit the North Tower almost dead center. It had to tweak all the parameters till they screamed bloody murder and say that the steel was far weaker than it actually was, the fire was far hotter than it actually was, the sagging was far greater than it actually was, and so on. And so NIST hallucinated a computer-generated fantasy scenario for "collapse initiation"--the failure of a few floors."
"But how do you get from the failure of a few floors to total collapse at free-fall speed of the entire structure? The short answer: You don't. Anyone with the slightest grasp of the laws of physics understands that even if all of the vertical supports on a few floors somehow failed catastrophically at exactly the same moment--a virtually impossible event, but one necessary to explain why the Towers would come straight down rather than toppling sideways--the top part of the building could not fall THROUGH the still-intact, highly robust lower part of the building, straight through the path of most resistance, just as fast as it would have fallen through thin air."
"Thus total free-fall collapse, even given NIST's ridiculous "initiation" scenario, is utterly impossible. The probability of it happening is exactly equal to the probability of the whole building suddenly falling upward and landing on the moon."
Lying through gross distortion !! Speaker Pelosi, your pants are on fire.
This is proof that the Democratic leadership is corrupt. They say they want to stop the war but won't hold the Bush administration accountable - they will not impeach, they will not block supply in the US Senate.
The only option left is to vote for Ron Paul in 2008 (US readers !!)
Harwood explained that when CNBC did an online poll of who won the last GOP presidential debate on October 9, "Ron Paul dominated the debate, and some of my colleagues at CNBC thought that there was something wrong with that and they took the poll down. I want to tell you, my email box, thousands and thousands and thousands of email, like I haven't seen from any other -- you know, followers of Chris Dodd or Bill Richardson or Joe Biden."
Yeah, where are all the supporters of the other candidates ???
Ron Paul's campaign is still in deep trouble, not because of any lack of popularity but because criminal elements of the US establishment are likely to employ illegal measures to stop him.
The corporate media are already doing their best to censor most stories that include news of Paul's support (see here -and take note of the comments). However, you might argue that this is is dishonest, not illegal. One thing we will see, without question, is the use of Vote Fraud, a serious crime, to rig upcoming election results in which Ron Paul is running. Paul has already been a victim of such tactics in Iowa.
The main problem is that Vote Fraud HAS happened on a large scale in the 2004 Presidential Elections (see here) and to a lesser extent in the mid term elections of 2006 (and here). This is a real challenge to electing an honest politician in the USA.
A Brief Overview of Congressman Paul’s Record -which explains why he is getting such widespread support:
He has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.
He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program. He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.
(thanks to Tired for the link !)
Tuesday, 16 October 2007
An Open Letter to the Ron Paul Faithful
So there was our after-debate poll. The numbers grew ... 7,000-plus votes after a couple of hours ... and Ron Paul was at 75%.
Now Paul is a fine gentleman with some substantial backing and, by the way, was a dynamic presence throughout the debate , but I haven't seen him pull those kind of numbers in any "legit" poll. Our poll was either hacked or the target of a campaign. So we took the poll down.
The next day, our email basket was flooded with Ron Paul support messages. And the computer logs showed the poll had been hit with traffic from Ron Paul chat sites. I learned other Internet polls that night had been hit in similar fashion. Congratulations. You folks are obviously well-organized and feel strongly about your candidate and I can't help but admire that.
But you also ruined the purpose of the poll. It was no longer an honest "show of hands" -- it suddenly was a platform for beating the Ron Paul drum. That certainly wasn't our intention and certainly doesn't serve our readers ... at least those who aren't already in the Ron Paul camp.
(for the full letter see the link- SpookyP)
A Ron Paul Supporter's Open Reply to Mr. Wastler's Open Letter to the Ron Paul Faithful From Szandor Blestman
I read your explanation for taking down the Ron Paul poll and I must say I was taken aback. First, let me say that the opinions expressed here are my own and I speak for no one else. That said, I’d like to say thank you for your backhanded compliment “You guys are good. Real good.” I say it’s backhanded because of the implications it leaves unsaid. When you follow it up with the accusation that the poll was hacked, it implies that the “Ron Paul faithful,” as you call them, have done something wrong. Hacking is a practice where someone breaks into a website's server or even a personal computer and changes programming code or steals data, usually for nefarious purposes. Often when this happens, fingerprints are left. Hacking is a crime. It is the destruction or theft of someone else’s property, the cyber equivalent of breaking and entering or defacing private property. If you are accusing someone of hacking, you should produce proof and try to catch the perpetrators. In fact, if your organization had been paying attention they should have seen that this kind of activity has happened in the past and they should have been prepared. Your organization should have the resources to do something about that. There are ways to stop hackers, just as there are ways to stop burglars. But your poll wasn’t exactly hacked now, was it? In fact, by your own admission, you said the poll was flooded, which isn’t exactly hacking.
Now, let me return the compliment, but I will be a little more forward about it. You, sir, are also good. You are good at minimizing the significance of an event. You are good at taking facts and spinning them into something they are not. If you were an alchemist of old, you may have been able to take lead and turn it to gold. You compliment the “Ron Paul faithful,” calling them good, recognizing that they are well organized and feel strongly about their candidate on the one hand, and then you chastise them for expressing their strong feelings in a fair and significant way on the other. As far as I know, everyone had equal access to your poll and anyone with access to a computer could have voted on it. Am I wrong? Was there some flaw with the poll that somehow caused the followers of other candidates to not be able to vote? Were the Huckabee faithful somehow denied access? How about the Giuliani gang? McCain’s crowd? If I had felt Thompson stood out from the rest of the candidates, would I have been somehow forbidden from voting for him? If this is the case the fault is yours and not that of the “Ron Paul faithful.”
You say your poll may have been the target of an organized campaign and suggest that the participants came from Ron Paul chat rooms. So what? It is a campaign, sir. It is called a political campaign. Any other candidate could have mobilized his supporters to do the same, if he had that kind of support. It is part of the democratic process we in this country seem to take so much pride in. What you are doing, sir, when you complain about such things, is in essence shaming the “Ron Paul faithful” for paying attention. You are shaming them for taking action. You are shaming them for supporting their candidate. And, more importantly, you are trying to stymie their attempts to express their point of view. It is not the fault of Ron Paul supporters if supporters of other candidates do not show up to vote in your poll.
You say this poll was the cyber equivalent of asking the room for a show of hands on a certain question. I like that analogy. What you have done is in essence come into the room which was full of Ron Paul supporters, asked them a question, and then told everyone to put their hands down, that you really didn’t mean to ask that question, when you saw how many hands were raised.
Now I have a few unproven suggestions of my own to make to you, but before I do let me say that you, at least, do acknowledge that Ron Paul is a fine gentleman with substantial backing (more than “some” substantial backing) and that he was a dynamic presence at the debate. That is much better than the talking heads and pundits on TV. I congratulate you for recognizing those characteristics, but to follow it up with the statement that you haven’t seen him pull those kind of numbers in any “legit” poll makes one wonder if the compliment was put there simply for the purpose of keeping the “Ron Paul faithful” from questioning the follow up statement. Well, I do question the follow up statement. I question the legitimacy of your so called “legit” polls. Isn’t it possible that perhaps those polls are simply asking the wrong people? I know I’ve never been polled. Perhaps the people that are coming out in support of Ron Paul no longer have land line phones and therefore can not be contacted by your so-called “legit” polls. Perhaps many of Ron Paul’s supporters that watched the debate are not registered Republicans. Perhaps the “legit” polls are simply no longer significant. Or, perhaps there is some more nefarious purpose to these “legit” polls that we are not being told. It seems to me that many polls I’ve seen in the past decade or so have been questionable. I remember more than a few times seeing a poll and thinking “I don’t believe that.” I personally trust the “unscientific” Internet and phone polls that allow anyone to answer more than the “scientific” polls which are somewhat secretive as to how the data is gathered. Even when a poll states how the data was gathered you have to trust that the people conducting the poll did, in fact, do as they say they did. Poll people can say anything they want and I have no way of knowing if they are being honest.
If, however, you want to talk about numbers, and if you trust the numbers shown on “scientific” polls, I’d like to point to the numbers from polls taken on the Iraq War. It seems to me that poll after poll shows that public sentiment is more and more against the war. I’ve seen numbers between 65-80 percent of the public are against the war. Ron Paul is the only Republican candidate that has come out against the war. You took down your poll when Ron had 75 percent of the vote. That falls right in line with the numbers against the war. Perhaps the poll makes more sense to you now.
You suggested that a well organized and committed “few” can throw the results of a system meant to reflect the sentiments of “the many.” Are you suggesting that there are only a “few” Ron Paul supporters? After nearly thirty thousand votes, Ron Paul is leading with 86% of the vote in some categories. If you think the same “few” people are repeatedly voting, I suggest you figure out a way to stop that. CNBC.com should have plenty of resources to do that, and if you don’t I suggest you hire someone. Most Internet polls won’t let you vote more than once from any one Internet connection.
I suggest that CNBC is trying to influence the perception of who “the many” support. How much time did Ron Paul get to speak at your debate compared to the other candidates? How many questions was he asked compared to the others? Why did the commentators afterward focus so much on the other candidates? Why is Ron Paul so often referred to as a “lower tier” candidate, even after he was able to raise over 5 million dollars in the third quarter? Remember, this was 5 million from everyday, hard working Americans, not money from corporations which the other candidates depend on. In fact, I wonder what candidates CNBC or any of its affiliates have given money to. That’s a lot of money from the masses of humanity, and that suggests to me that Ron Paul’s following is much larger than you, sir, are willing to admit. I also know that when I talk to people on the street or at work, a great many of them are behind Ron Paul. TV might be very influential on how people think, but we still talk to each other and we still know the difference between the reality of the real world and the fantasy of the tube.
One last point I’d like to make. It doesn’t surprise me at all that your poll shows so many in favor of Ron Paul, and it has nothing to do with hacking, spamming, or targeting. It has to do with people being fed up. People are fed up with the same old, same old. They are fed up with being lied to. They are fed up with giving politicians a mandate and then having those same politicians refuse to follow through. Many are even fed up with the news media not doing their job. They are fed up with the way the world is run. They are fed up with being disenfranchised by the political system. Ron Paul is a breath of fresh air. He is obviously a man of principle. He offers a message of freedom and hope. He offers us a break from the corruption that has permeated the government. He praises our Constitution. He is the only candidate running for president that, in my opinion, can take this country in a different direction, a better direction.
Sir, I believe your letter was disingenuous. Time and again your letter belittles the efforts of Ron Paul’s supporters while complimenting the people themselves. Time and again you imply that Ron Paul has little support. Your evidence of “legit” polls not showing the numbers is conjecture at best and the method itself is either outdated or misinformation at worst. The evidence presented by the Internet and (cell) phone polls taken after the debates of the last few months is more accurate, in my opinion. The evidence presented by Ron Paul’s fundraising, the volunteerism of his supporters, the people on the street when you talk to them, the signs spontaneously going up, the videos online, the meetup groups, the songs, all these things are evidence of a grassroots movement the likes of which haven’t been seen in this country since 1776. You, sir, as the general manager of CNBC.com should not be worried about the results of a poll so much as you should be making sure that everyone has fair access to that poll. You should not be in the business of suggesting to me what to think so much as you should be in the business of presenting the results and letting me decide for myself what to think. I can make up my own mind, thank you very much.
Monday, 15 October 2007
Sunday, 14 October 2007
Large areas of Iraq ARE contaminated with radiological material left over from US anti-armour munititions. The people living there have been condemned to a future of sickness and death (see the link).
The persons who authorised the use of these weapons need to get their heads checked. They need to be put on trial. DU weapons must be banned immediately and a massive clean up operation undertaken.
DU contamination will be one of the major issues of the 21st century.
Saturday, 13 October 2007
Many other witnesses also reported hearing and feeling massive explosions in the lower levels of the Twin Towers far away from the damaged areas (see some of their testimony in the link).
These accounts simply strengthen the irrefutable scientific evidence we have proving that the World Trade Centre Buildings were demolished using explosives. The debate is over. It's time we had a criminal investigation into the 911 murders.
I particularly like the author's response to the claim that Ron Paul's campaign team is rigging the polls:
The money thing is very important. A campaign without any real support simply does not raise 5 million dollars.
Friday, 12 October 2007
Early in 2007, Interlink Books published my Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory. The stimulus for my writing this book was the appearance in August 2006---just before the fifth anniversary of 9/11---of four publications intended to bolster the official account by debunking the alternative view, according to which 9/11 was an inside job. The most explicit and well-known of these publications was a book by Popular Mechanics entitled Debunking 9/11 Myths.
My book’s introduction and conclusion dealt with the irresponsible way the press, including the left-leaning press, has dealt with this issue. One of their failings, I showed, was simply to accept the official reports --- especially The 9/11 Commission Report and the report on the World Trade Center put out by the National Institute for Science and Technology (NIST) -- as neutral, scientific reports. They thereby ignored the fact that the 9/11 Commission was run by Philip Zelikow, who was virtually a member of the US. Bush administration, and that NIST is an agency of the U.S. Department of Commerce and hence of the Bush administration (which has distorted science for political purposes to an unprecedented extent).
Professor Griffin has released a revised version of his book that contains confirmation of certain issues that were unresloved in the first printing (check out the link for the full story).
For those that don't know, Griffin is one of the leading academics who is attempting to inform the public about the bogus nature of the official report(s) into the 911 attacks.
A growing number of US people want this bloke to win and change their country into something so much better. It can happen, but he will need massive help to overcome the establishment and their control of the vote. Never forget that vote fraud is a real problem to overcome in the US.
Good luck Ron Paul and US citizens !!
The only problem we have is that those Neocons over in the White House will say and do anything to make us believe that Iran is intent on producing a nuclear bomb. It's the same propaganda program we saw used against Iraq when they told us about the certainty of Saddam's Weapons of Mass Destruction.
Wednesday, 10 October 2007
In the video you will see pictures of yellowish orange metal being removed from the World Trade Centre rubble pile. From the colour we can determine that the metal is likely to be steel at approximately 850-1000 degrees celsius . The metal was obviously much hotter since it has had time to cool. The problem here is that the official NISTs study only provides evidence for fires in the WTC buildings at 650 degrees celsius. These fires, characterised by the billowing black smoke, were typical oxygen starved fires that burn at around 400-600 degrees celsius. Without doubt the World Trade Centre fires were not excessively hot fires.
Nevertheless a source of intense heat is still required to account for the Melted the Steel seen in the video and it can only be attributed to two other causes:
1. A blast furnace (the rubble pile was not a blast furnace), or
"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."
If explosives were used, then part of the attacks on the WTC complex must have involved inside help.
Well, this is very interesting coming from inside the Washington Post, a newspaper that has a record for regugitating the lies spun by the White House.
In the past the paper has covered for the Administration. For example, fairly recently it has been caught out altering critical information on the war in Iraq - hiding the fact that the "Iranian made" improvised explosive devices were actually being produced in Iraq (see here). This information undermines a key White House claim that the Iranians are meddling in Iraq-a claim that is being trumpeted so that the neo cons will have an excuse to launch another unprovoked war.
If cold fusion devices can be made to work, then each house may end up having its own independent power supply separate from the power grid. Decentralised, cheap and non-polluting electricity would drastically change the nature of world affairs. That is the hope anyway.
Paul's message is driving his campaign popularity. Ron Paul is anti war and anti big government. Public rallies and huge internet support reveal vastly more people support him in the US than the mainstream networks let on. The corporate run news media censor him because he is a threat to the establishment, and they (the media owners) are part of this establishment.
It is important that Paul wins the US Presidential elections to put an end to many of the problems plaguing the US at this time.
Here is a sample You Tube video that demonstrates the nature of Paul's message and campaign:
Tuesday, 9 October 2007
Holy Cow, can this be right ?
Soft tissue surviving for 70 million years ?
I'm sure the scientists involved will do everything they can to get as much DNA sequencing as possible from the remains- although after 70 million years there would not be any of it left intact. They will have to work from the bits.
I'd like to think they could clone a new dinosaur from this stuff but the degenerative and environmental damage to the tissue would be too great. Rats !!
UPDATE: Architects and Engineers For 911 Truth- More than 190* Building Experts say 911 was an Inside Job
More than One Hundred and Ninety building experts now say that the attacks on the World Trade Centre were an inside job. The science behind the attacks is irrefutable. The number of experts supporting the "Inside Job" hypothesis increases daily.
Exposing the truth is necessary to stop any further false flag attacks that will be used as an excuse to clamp down on US freedoms and possibly launch a new War verses Iran. We live in dangerous times and we need experts like these to help fight against the lies. Most critically, the information they provide can be used by honourable Law Enforcement, Judicial and Military persons in actions against the real suspects. Let Justice be Done.
Sunday, 7 October 2007
911 Truth is all about seeking justice for the poor souls who perished on that day. Real justice needs to be meted out to the unconscionable individuals who ran the terror operation and made victims out of us all.
In the video you will see people falling to their deaths and masses of residents fleeing through the streets after the first tower is demolished.
Make no mistake- there is scientific evidence proving the World Trade Centre buildings did not collapse due to the aircraft hits and subsequent fires.
Get mad and write to your papers demanding a proper investigation into this crime. We all need to think about the consequences of these attacks and work to stop the wars in the Middle East.
Idiots to ever use the stuff. They know not what they do ...
Friday, 5 October 2007
Pharmaceutical Companies Reject Anti-Cancer Drug Trials Because they Can't Make Enough Money Selling It
Dichloroacetate - a very promising drug indeed.
It's worth checking out to see how the human trials pan out.
Thursday, 4 October 2007
Presidential Candidate Ron Paul, claimed by the US mainstream press to have little support, raises more money than many of the TOP Republican runners !
The US corporate news networks are nothing but propaganda tools for the establishment that is hell bent on war. They have been trying to bury Paul because he is anti war and anti big government. It should be of no surprise that Paul is widely popular in the community and that his fund raising is going so well. (Ron Paul is the most popular candidate on the internet by a massive margin.)
Paul is the only honest politician in town and he will shake things up in Washington if he ever gets into the White House. The powers that be will not allow this ... nevertheless, do all you can to give Paul the best chance.
(thanks to Tired for the link !)
Crime Scene Investigation: There is NOTHING Wrong with the Evidence that Proves 911 was an Inside Job.
Of critical importance is the physical evidence which points to inside involvement in the attacks on the World Trade Centre. The discovery of Molten Steel and Thermate Explosive products at ground zero are concrete indicators showing that the buildings were pre-rigged with explosives (see here for a full explanation). Only individuals with complete access to these buildings could have planted the devices that brought down the Twin Towers and Building 7. Bin Laden's men could not have gained the necessary access to do the job.
The main obstacle in achieving a measure of real justice in this case is the inability of the public, journalists, and many intellectuals, to come to grips with the hard scientific facts. If this was a less significant, smaller scale crime, then one would have to conclude the official story was faulty based on the evidence at hand. But because we are entering the taboo realm of larger scale "government conspiracies" we are met with an instant wall of disbelief. The cultural stigma against these sorts of conspiracy "claims" is immense and consequently, despite the overwhelming evidence, most people are unable to come to terms with the facts right before their eyes (an all too common human trait).
Part of the problem lies with the myriad of explanations that support the official narrative. We have the findings of the 911 Commission, FEMA, NIST and the subsequent endorsements from Popular Mechanics and Purdue University all saying the same thing. However, because we have established scientific evidence -Molten Steel & Thermate products- that run counter to these "authoritative investigations" we must be suspicious of their conclusions. In fact, in light of our specific evidence, their conclusions MUST be wrong.
The difficulty, as with all criminal investigation, is for people to keep a rational mind and fully understand the forensic evidence. Overcoming the conspiracy stigma and recognising that there are no alternatives to the core evidence of Molten Steel and Thermate, other than the inside job hypothesis, is key.
The simple fact of the matter is that steel will not Melt by itself. Its melting point is known and the fires in the WTC buildings were simply nowhere near hot enough to cause any such melting. Added to the Molten Steel evidence (illustrated by the photo at top) are descriptions of explosions in the lower levels of the WTC buildings and perhaps the most damning smoking gun of all- the Thermate Explosive signature which was revealed in scientific analysis of Metals found at WTC ground zero.
"When the impossible has been eliminated, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."
The truth then, according to the evidence, clearly reveals the World Trade Centre Towers were demolished by pre-positioned explosive devices. How this operation was carried out is a question that remains to be answered- but the science described thus far is unequivocal. (And it makes a lot of sense in terms of the rapid collapse times, the pulverised concrete that covered many city blocks and the structural analysis indicating that the aircraft impacts could not have significantly damaged the buildings enough for them to fail -especially Building 7 that was not hit by an aeroplane).
What needs to happen next is up to honest authorities- politicians, police, judicial, and military leaders. The case has been made and now action must be taken. First on the list should be the immediate detention, and questioning, of suspects who have covered up the 911 crime and the establishment of a new investigation. Mass murders were committed and justice is yet to be served.
This essay hopefully attempts to redraw the issue at hand, in terms of 911 Truth and Justice, highlighting the fact that there is nothing wrong with the inside job evidence only a problem with communicating the significance of the evidence to the public and responsible authorities.
Please note: 911 is our chance to blow the lid on many levels of corruption in the USA and a chance to reshape US institutions to provide a more equitable future for all Americans. We need to solve a great crime and punish those who were really responsible. The War on Terror can end if we can get our heads around the scientific evidence that is there for all to see.
Wednesday, 3 October 2007
UPDATE: Ahh.... it's not so easy to get these batteries to work in the circumstances described. http://www.rense.com/general78/edre.htm Well, it's a nice idea.
I still expect there will be some sort of battery revolution in the near future, so I'll leave the story up as a flag for potential new developments.
Tuesday, 2 October 2007
According to the Khorramshar News Agency, which represents ethnic Arabs in opposition to Ahmadinejad's regime who live near the reactor, the Russians packed their bags and left on Friday.
This is a very important insight into the kind of people who are employed by, and who advise, the current Neo Conservative US Administration. Although this is just one aide, you should not underestimate how widespread her views are. Do not forget this truth about the existing US government.
These are people with extremist views that pose a danger to world peace. They must be stopped. Arrest Bush and Cheney (on easily proved War Crimes charges) NOW !
Put an end to the madness.
Monday, 1 October 2007
In order to believe that George Bush won the November 2, 2004 presidential election, you must also believe all of the following extremely improbable or outright impossible things.1
1) A big turnout and a highly energized and motivated electorate favored the GOP instead of the Democrats for the first time in history.2
2) Even though first-time voters, lapsed voters (those who didn’t vote in 2000), and undecideds went for John Kerry by big margins, and Bush lost people who voted for him in the cliffhanger 2000 election, Bush still received a 3.4 million vote surplus nationally.3
3) The fact that Bush far exceeded the 85% of registered Florida Republicans’ votes that he got in 2000, receiving in 2004 more than 100% of the registered Republican votes in 24 out of 67 Florida counties, more than 200% of registered Republicans in 10 counties, over 300% of registered Republicans in 4 counties, more than 400% of Registered Republicans in 4 counties, and over 700% in one county. This could only be explained by a massive crossover vote in these specific counties by registered Democrats and/or Independents. Bush's share of crossover votes by registerd Democrats in Florida, however, did not actually increase over 2000 and he lost ground among registered Independents, dropping 15 points. Floridians were just so enthused about Bush and Cheney that they somehow managed to overrule basic math.4
4) The fact that Bush got more votes than registered voters, and the fact that by stark contrast participation rates in many Democratic strongholds in Ohio and Florida fell to as low as less than 8%, do not indicate a rigged election.5
5)Bush won re-election despite approval ratings below 50% - the first time in history this has happened. Harry Truman has been cited as having also done this, but Truman’s polling numbers were trailing so much behind his challenger, Thomas Dewey, pollsters stopped surveying two weeks before the 1948 elections, thus missing the late surge of support for Truman. Unlike Truman, Bush’s support was clearly eroding on the eve of the election.6
6) Harris' and Zogby’s last-minute polling indicating a Kerry victory was wrong (even though Harris and Zogby were exactly on the mark in their 2000 election final polls).7
7) The “challenger rule” - an incumbent’s final results won’t be better than his final polling - was wrong;8
8) On election day the early-day voters picked up by early exit polls (showing Kerry with a wide lead) were heavily Democratic instead of the traditional pattern of early voters being mainly Republican.
9) The fact that Bush “won” Ohio by 51-48%, but this was not matched by the court-supervised hand count of the 147,400 absentee and provisional ballots in which Kerry received 54.46% of the vote doesn’t cast any suspicion upon the official tally.9
10) Florida computer programmer Clinton Curtis (a life-long registered Republican) must be lying when he said in a sworn affidavit that his employers at Yang Enterprises, Inc. (YEI) and Tom Feeney (general counsel and lobbyist for YEI, GOP state legislator and Jeb Bush’s 1994 running mate for Florida Lt. Governor) asked him in 2000 to create a computer program to undetectably alter vote totals. Curtis, under the initial impression that he was creating this software in order to forestall possible fraud, handed over the program to his employer Mrs. Li Woan Yang, and was told: “You don’t understand, in order to get the contract we have to hide the manipulation in the source code. This program is needed to control the vote in south Florida.” (Boldface in original).10
11) Diebold CEO Walden O’Dell’s declaration in a August 14, 2003 letter to GOP fundraisers that he was "committed to helping Ohio to deliver its electoral votes to the president next year" and the fact that Diebold is one of the three major suppliers of the electronic voting machines in Ohio and nationally, didn’t result in any fraud by Diebold.
12) There was no fraud in Warren County, Ohio where they admitted counting the votes in secret before bringing them out in public to count, citing an unidentified FBI agent's warning of a terrorist incident as the rationale, a report that the FBI denies ever making.
13) CNN reported at 9 p.m. EST on election evening that Kerry was leading by 3 points in the national exit polls based on well over 13,000 respondents. Several hours later at 1:36 a.m. CNN reported that the exit polls, now based on a few hundred more - 13,531 respondents - were showing Bush leading by 2 points, a 5-point swing. In other words, a swing of 5 percentage points from a tiny increase in the number of respondents somehow occurred despite it being mathematically impossible.11
14) Exit polls in the November 2004 Ukrainian presidential elections, paid for in part by the Bush administration, were right, but exit polls in the U.S., where exit polling was invented, were very wrong.12
15) The National Election Pool’s exit polls13 were so far off that since their inception twenty years ago, they have never been this wrong, more wrong than statistical probability indicates is possible.
16) In every single instance where exit polls were wrong the discrepancy favored Bush, even though statistical probability tells us that any survey errors should show up in both directions. Half a century of polling and centuries of mathematics must be wrong.
Extract from an essay by Professor Dennis Loo. More details in the link.
This is the real shame about the USA and their wars. Stopping those in power is almost impossible since they can rig elections to have any candidate they like. The US electoral system is as bad as any 3rd World dictatorship. The US is NOT a democracy.
(There needs to be some dramatic changes enacted to put an end to all this corruption. The first step is to expose the problem. Linking to articles like this is a good start.)
Published on Friday, September 28, 2007 by CommonDreams.org
by Mark Klempner
I consider the Internet to be one of the world’s great wonders. And also America’s last hope for a free press.
When I was growing up in the 1970s, there were many people with a lot of things to say, but they generally had no platform. That’s why we needed figures like Bob Dylan to be “the voice of a generation.”
The present generation has YouTube, whose motto-irresistible to young people-is “Broadcast Yourself.” So now, for example, a pert 18-year-old known as “AngryLittleGirl” can challenge her peers regarding their lack of critical thinking, especially when it comes to religion, by uploading a video op-ed. As of this moment, her piece has been viewed by more than two million people.
YouTube is but one manifestation of a rapidly expanding “social media” that performs the vital function of promoting honest discussion and analysis at a time when spin, trivia, and advertising dominate the mass market profit-driven mainstream media –or MSM as it is often called on the net. Social media also encompasses web-based interactive communication tools such as blogs, message boards, forums, pod casts, online communities, and wikis.
I have seen bloggers expose mistakes and biases in the MSM within hours or even minutes of an article’s release. For instance, when New York Times science writer William Broad ran a piece deflating Al Gore’s claims about global warming, numerous bloggers pounced on it for being sloppy and skewed. Among them were Robert Dietz and Julie Millican at Media Matters, who documented how Broad had misrepresented the backgrounds of most of the supposedly “rank-and-file” experts quoted.
I don’t know what possessed Broad to so bend his reporting that he would lose credibility across a wide swath of readers (something he has in common with journalist Judith Miller, with whom he co-authored a book), but I do know that the MSM has become consolidated to the point that just a few transnational conglomerates and capital management companies control network TV, commercial radio, and most of our newspapers.
As for the repercussions of this ominous development, John Carroll, former editor of the Los Angeles Times, states them quite clearly: “Gone is the notion that a newspaper should lead, that it has an obligation to the community, that it is beholden to the public.” The current owners, he explains, care only about money, and “are sometimes genuinely perplexed to find people in their midst who do not feel beholden, first and foremost, to the shareholder.”
Bloggers are in an entirely different position: They tend to be mavericks who work for free, and operate far from the sources of power. Feeling no need to ingratiate themselves with the movers and shakers of industry and government, they simply tell it like it is from where they sit as concerned, informed citizens with diverse areas of expertise. Though they don’t often have professional training as journalists, many of them exceed professional journalistic standards, because they answer to their consciences alone rather than to corporate honchos and fund managers. We need to hear from such people, and the fact that there are more blogs out there worth reading than anyone has time to read is a hopeful sign.
Of course, the blogosphere is also filled with nonsense, and worse –as might be expected in any open space that lacks gatekeepers. The all-too-human reality of the web is that the majority of its traffic is directed to sex sites. What’s more, hate groups of all kinds find it a perfect forum to purvey their sick ideas. Even the benign Wikipedia can be used to disseminate false information with an effortlessness that has earned it the gratitude of propagandists everywhere.
How remarkable, then, that out of the cyberslime the lotus of a truly free press has been able to grow. Citizens seeking to avail themselves of the valuable commentary to be found on the web, as well as the fact checking services of legions of bloggers, can learn to easily bypass the detritus and go directly to those sites that offer valuable content.
Where, though, does one turn for in-depth investigative reporting? Though projects such as The Real News Network are attempting to create an alternative, the MSM is still pretty much the only show in town. Bloggers are generally not trained or equipped to do such reporting, and anyway, it´s a full time job that usually requires travel and a support staff, as well as knowledge and contacts developed over many years.
Newspapers carry out at least 80% of primary reporting. And yet the newspapers have repeatedly failed us, sometimes with tragic consequences, such as during the buildup to war in Iraq. In his documentary Buying the War, Bill Moyers (an exception to the rule that there are no outstanding journalists working in television) exposes how reporters at newspapers such as the Washington Post consistently deferred to the wishes of the Bush administration or were tricked, pressured or seduced into doing so. And behind Bush are the huge corporations that helped to put him into power, including those that own the MSM. What’s a citizen to do?
Again I say: go to the Internet. Though it’s worthwhile to read the print publications that pursue quality reporting-and some of the smaller ones really need our support-subscribing is not essential: nearly all of the important articles from these publications may be found on the web, and bloggers often link to them. And besides, there is also some fine web-based reporting, such as (to pick an example that is apropos to this discussion) the Salon piece that dissected and disposed of the myth, perpetuated by the MSM in tandem with then press secretary Ari Fleischer, that the exiting Clinton staff had removed the W’s from their keyboards, and in other ways vandalized government property.
As our titanic democracy is sinking and the band of trivia and denial plays on, each Internet connection can function as an intellectual life preserver. The net has also proved invaluable as a way for concerned citizens to offer support to each other, and to act together for political and social change.
From Salon in 1995, to Common Dreams in 1997, AlterNet in 1998, truthout in 2001, The Raw Story in 2004, and The Huffington Post in 2005, the news coverage on the Internet has matured to the point where we don’t really need to deal directly with the MSM anymore. As my wife says, “No MSG in my takeout; no MSM in my living room.” One household at a time, we’ll escape the grasp of the Rupert Murdochs of this world, at least when they meddle with our freedom of the press.
Those Meteors and Comets are dangerous ! Pity we don't have a proper system in place to look out for these objects and deflect their trajectories away from the earth. Add that on the "things to do" list.
It goes on to mention that an estimated 67% of Gulf War I veteran's children suffer from severe illnesses or birth defects.
This might not be entirely due to Depleted Uranium contamination (as the troops in the first Gulf War were also given experimental "vaccinations" against chemical and biological agents) but one would assume that DU is a major factor. This time around thousands, rather than hundreds, of tonnes of this material has been dropped all over the Middle East. If the situation was bad in the first war then things are a whole lot worse now.
US military or political chiefs who authorised the US military's use of DU weapons need to be held accountable.