Hi everyone.

You know I flip through all the news channels quite often and I am continually seeing "polls" on whether or not we should attack Iraq but I have never heard anyone explain WHY we would do so.

What are they doing now that warrants attack that they weren't doing last month or last year or 10 years ago?? That's the part of the story I keep missing when I'm flipping through the channels.

I'm just puzzled about this one. Any thoughts anyone???

hi Peggy..It basically stems from Iraq refusing to let weapons inspectors into the country...
While the general idea so North America will stand by their man is to believe Saddam is working on nuclear warfare,in his supposed bid to wreak havoc on the USA ...an underlying suggestion is its B**** stepping stone to taking over many countries,at least the other countries will view it as such.
Its well known the american administration sides with Israel,and it may end up being america and Israel against many of these countries in the near future. It will get even more interesting when China and Russia get in the mix. It then becomes WW3.

So the way I see this is..its ok for the USA and Russia to have nuclear weapons, but not Iraq. I guess Iraqs are worse..(??)
The words propaganda,conspiracy,and antichrist come to mind.
B*** getting involved in this will only help aid to his own countries demise.
And soon,other countries get involved and start to blow each other up.
Then we have Armegeddon.
So all is going according to plan.
--------
From Mother Shipton

When pictures seem alive with movements free,
when boats like fishes swim beneath the sea.
When men like birds shall scour the sky.
Then half the world, deep drenched in blood shall die

For storms will rage and oceans roar
when Gabriel stands on sea and shore,
and as he blows his wondrous horn
old worlds die and new be born

Well, maybe attacking Iraq???
www.debka.com http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_32068,0005.htm

They just did yesterday....but no mention in the mainstream press....

Aries, good answer, you took the words out of my mouth pretty much....I am far too tired to add to it now.

Aries.....well I do not want to believe that this is the beginning of the end...after all the end HAS been predicted at every evil event since the beginning, right?

However....for you knOwflakes....who are not 'Mericans...let me tell you....if Bush and his cronies...think that WE THE PEOPLE will allow that horses petute to stand on top of the dead bodies of 3000 innocent people and say to the world..."hey man...now I can reach Saddam"....well...it's not going over.

I have heard No ONE say they support this.

We have other things we need to do...and people to take care of right here.

And the general feeling is....we need to rebuild Afghanistan and help them get on their feet first.

We agree....Iraq has done nothing in the last 10 years they were not doing 10 years ago.

The American people don't like the idea...at all...and we feel that the 'terrorist' threat is a smokescreen...for the Bush ego...who was a snot nosed punk ass little mommas rich boy when his daddy blew it in '92....and no I am NOT afraid to type his name.... let him track me down...and we'll talk...he hasn't the balls for what I would say to his face. It's called freedom of speech.

If they attacked...and it looks like they did from that link...they kept it hush hush...because they know We The People would be furious.

Even vets I know who served in the persian gulf...do not think we have to attack.

And I am not kidding when I say it's as if he thinks he's going to stand on all the dead bodies of 9/11 so he can be a little taller.

I have faith that people ARE paying attention (like they never have before)...to what our government does...

In the meantime...I am going to send that link to a couple of select places...and lets see if we can get the word out.

Times have changed over here....when they killed those people.....they made it personal...and that goes for politics too.

Today is a primary election here in my state......and so far...as results are coming in..it would appear that all the old standard type professional politicians have been tossed out...people want change...and they want it yesterday.

Love and Peace,

Dani

Dani

I think you are right about Bush standing on the bodies of the 3000 innocent victims of 9-11 I dug up this article about a document called Operation Northwood, which scares the pants off of me, since it was first conceived of in the 60's?!?!?! Anyway, give it a read - I'm not saying I belive everything that follows 100%, but if it is even half true than most of the rest of the world needs to count on 'you the people' to save us all!!!!

Love,
Terri

New book on NSA sheds light on secrets
U.S. terror plan called Cuba invasion pretext
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Scott Shane and Tom Bowman
Sun Staff
Originally published April 24, 2001

WASHINGTON - U.S. military leaders proposed in 1962 a secret plan to commit terrorist acts against Americans and blame Cuba to create a pretext for invasion and the ouster of Communist leader Fidel Castro, according to a new book about the National Security Agency.

"We could develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington," said one document reportedly prepared by the Joint Chiefs of Staff. "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," the document says. "Casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of indignation."

The plan is laid out in documents signed by the five Joint Chiefs but never carried out, according to writer James Bamford in "Body of Secrets." The new history of the Fort Meade-based eavesdropping agency is being released today by Doubleday.

NSA regularly picks up the conversations of suspected terrorist financier Osama bin Laden, says Bamford, and has monitored Chinese and French companies trying to sell missiles to Iran. He provides new details about an Israeli attack on a Navy eavesdropping ship in 1967, suggesting that the sinking was deliberate. And he reveals the loss of an "entire warehouse" full of secret cryptographic gear to the North Vietnamese in 1975, at the end of the Vietnam War.

Bamford, a former investigative reporter for ABC News who wrote "The Puzzle Palace" about the NSA in 1982, said his new book is based mostly on documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act or found in government archives. "NSA never handed me any documents," he said. "It was a question of digging."

He said he was most surprised by the anti-Cuba terror plan, code-named Operation Northwoods. It "may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government," he writes.

The Northwoods plan also proposed that if the 1962 launch of John Glenn into orbit were to fail, resulting in the astronaut's death, the U.S. government would publicize fabricated evidence that Cuba had used electronic interference to sabotage the flight, the book says.

A previously secret document obtained by Bamford offers further suggestions for mayhem to be blamed on Cuba.

"We could sink a boatload of Cubans en route to Florida (real or simulated). ... We could foster attempts on lives of Cubans in the United States, even to the extent of wounding in instances to be widely publicized," the document says. Another idea was to shoot down a CIA plane designed to replicate a passenger flight and announce that Cuban forces shot it down.

Citing a White House document, Bamford writes that the idea of creating a pretext for the invasion of Cuba might have started with President Dwight D. Eisenhower in the last weeks of his administration, when the plan for an invasion by Cuban exiles trained in the United States was hatched. Carried out in April 1961, soon after Kennedy became president, the Bay of Pigs invasion proved a fiasco. Castro's forces quickly killed or rounded up the invaders.

Army Gen. Lyman L. Lemnitzer, chairman of the Joint Chiefs, presented the Operation Northwoods plan to Kennedy early in 1962, but the president rejected it that March because he wanted no overt U.S. military action against Cuba. Lemnitzer then sought unsuccessfully to destroy all evidence of the plan, according to Bamford.

Lemnitzer and those who served with him in 1962 as chiefs of the nation's military branches are dead. But two former top Kennedy administration officials said yesterday that they were unaware of Operation Northwoods and questioned whether such a plan was ever drafted.

"I've never heard of Operation Northwoods. Never heard of it and don't believe it," said Theodore Sorenson, Kennedy's White House special counsel. "Obviously, it would be totally illegal as well as totally unwise."

Robert S. McNamara, Kennedy's defense secretary, said: "I never heard of it. I can't believe the chiefs were talking about or engaged in what I would call CIA-type operations."

Bamford writes that besides the Joint Chiefs, then-Assistant Secretary of Defense Paul H. Nitze also favored "provoking a phony war with Cuba."

"There may be a piece of paper" on Northwoods, said McNamara. "I just cannot conceive of [Nitze] approving anything like that or doing it without talking to me."

The book contains many other revelations in its detailed account of NSA, the biggest U.S. intelligence agency and Maryland's largest employer, with more than 25,000 personnel at Fort Meade, site of its global eavesdropping efforts.

Among them:

In recent years, NSA has regularly listened to bin Laden's unencrypted telephone calls. Agency officials have sometimes played tapes of bin Laden talking to his mother to impress members of Congress and select visitors to the agency.

In the late 1990s, NSA tracked efforts by Chinese and French companies to sell missile technology to Iran, particularly the C-802 anti-ship missile. The eavesdropping led to U.S. protests to the Chinese and French governments.

When U.S. troops evacuated Vietnam in 1975, "an entire warehouse overflowing with NSA's most important cryptographic machines and other supersensitive code and cipher materials" was left behind. It was the largest compromise of such equipment in U.S. history, Bamford writes, but the agency still has not acknowledged it.

When Israeli fighter jets attacked the NSA eavesdropping ship USS Liberty in the Mediterranean in 1967, killing 34 Americans and wounding 171, an NSA aircraft was listening in and heard Israeli pilots referring to the American flag on the ship. U.S. officials, including President Lyndon Baines Johnson, decided to forget the matter, Bamford writes, because they did not want to embarrass Israel. To this day, Israeli officials say their forces mistakenly attacked the U.S. ship.

Bamford says the reason for the strike was Israel's desperate effort to cover up its attacks on the Egyptian town of El Arish in the Sinai. The Liberty was sitting offshore and the Israelis feared that the ship would detect the operation, which included the shooting of prisoners.

Yesterday, an NSA spokesperson questioned a point made in the book about the USS Liberty.

"We do not comment on operational matters, alleged or otherwise; however, Mr. Bamford's claim that the NSA leadership was `virtually unanimous in their belief that the attack was deliberate' is simply not true," the spokesperson said.

When he wrote "The Puzzle Palace" in 1982, Bamford was attacked by some NSA officials, who said his revelations gave the Soviet Union and other U.S. adversaries too much information on the secret agency. One former director referred to him as "an unconvicted felon."

With the end of the Cold War, the agency has been less guarded. NSA's current director, Air Force Lt. Gen. Michael V. Hayden, has granted a number of interviews. Hayden "cracked the door open a tiny bit," said Bamford, partly to burnish NSA's public image and correct misconceptions.

Sun staff writer Laura Sullivan contributed to this article.
Copyright © 2001, The Baltimore Sun

That Operation Northwood's document was one of the scariest things I think I have ever read. For your viewing pleasure, the PDF file of the Northwood Document's.

quote:

---

hi Peggy..It basically stems from Iraq refusing to let weapons inspectors into the country...

---

Aries, can you come up with some other reasons WHY? This quote taken from: Iraq to use bio-weapons 'soon'

quote:

---

In a letter to UN Secretary General Kofi Annan late on Thursday, Iraqi Foreign Minister Naji Sabri extended an invitation to Blix and members of his team to discuss the possible resumption of weapons inspections, halted in December 1998.

But Blix said the chances of a possible war against Baghdad would go up if he were to visit but talks were unsuccessful. "The situation will be much worse if I visit Baghdad and the talks fail. We do not want hopes raised."

State-run Baghdad media has slammed the United States for rejecting Iraq's invitation to the chief UN weapons inspector.

---

Soooo ummmmmmm... yeah... now Iraq is INVITING weapon inspectors into their country and the U.S. is REJECTING??? Ohhhhhh brother... none of this makes any sense.

quote:

---

Aries.....well I do not want to believe that this is the beginning of the end...after all the end HAS been predicted at every evil event since the beginning, right?

---

Bahahahaha... in the beginning they didn't have weapons of mass destruction now did they? Human's have never built a weapon of mass destruction that they have not used throughout history. Now look at the kind of weapons we have at our hands today. Face it, it's not if but when, and I'm afraid that when is very soon.

quote:

---

AN Iraqi politician says President Saddam Hussein will soon use weapons of mass destruction.

Opposition Iraqi National Congress leader Ahmad Chalabi warned: "Saddam has advanced chemical weapons, he has advanced biological weapons, and he has produced and engineered biological weapons which contain a combination of viruses such as smallpox and ebola.

"Those are very, very dangerous weapons and I think, in his hands, he is bound to use them in terrorist action very soon."

---

Start buying your survival kits a.s.a.p.

The deceiver is Evil but the Real Danger is the deceived.

Be still, be still and watch.

BTW thanks Aries for your input on these very interesting topics and questions...

hi Rach..you're welcome!

Everyone should take the time to read Saddams speech.
Also, listen to the views of many of the world,including the UN who is wondering the same as you Peggy. They know Saddam HAS said he will allow weapons inspectors into Iraq..
From CNN, (and this is an important piece of info!!)...

.."The Iraqi people as well as their leaders appear convinced a U.S. strike is inevitable.

Last week, the United States rejected an offer to allow the chief U.N. arms inspector into the Iraqi capital for technical talks, and the White House continues to insist it wants a change in regime. "
http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/08/08/iraq.saddam/index.html

Hi everyone,

I'm starting to think we will never hear the real "why" on any news organization.

I think this is a very "deep" subject and I am listening very carefully. Things just do NOT add up.

I think the majority of Americans do NOT want this to happen.
But no one is asking us.

of course you wont hear the real reasons...and isnt anyone wondering why Bush isnt listening? Is there REALLY anything you all can do about it? Peggy, what do you think the real reason is..do you think it has something to do with oil, greed,etc?

The Saudis will NOT allow their air bases to be used..(as they did in the last war with Iraq) This changes things this time around.

Another key bit of info...

"Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud was quoted by the Associated Press Wednesday as saying, "We have told (The United States) we don't (want) them to use Saudi grounds" for any attack on Iraq.

The statement is in line with Saudi Arabia's public position that any regime change in Iraq should come from the Iraqi people, not outside military action".

Aries,

I agree with the Saudi posittion...and I gotta tell you ...I laughed when I heard that they said 'no'.

GOOD.

I think it's time to put Bushes chart back up here...with the USA's...how do we do that?

His Leo asc...is just roaring now......

I think this month could be critical....and it would appear that the Leo line-up might be scarier than the big opp.

Dani

ok folks, we have it in writing now...
http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/08/09/iraq.urban.war/index.html

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The United States dismisses Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's warning that an attack on Iraq would bring heavy casualties and failure
-------

Just caught a few seconds of a CNN "poll" as to why Americans think we would be attacking Iraq.

30% said because we suspect them of making biolodgical weapons.
30% said we think they offer support to terrorists.
6% said because they won't let UN inspectors in.
Everyone else just basically "unsure" as to the reasons.

50% support US attacks on Iraq. (According to their "unofficial" poll.)

So, guess we're all a little confused over here.

You know I read somewhere on the net lately that some of our top military people didn't want to bomb Iraq because it is the supposed cradle of civilization. (The Garden of Eden)

Lots of ancient artifacts over there that many do NOT want destroyed.

Peggy, history and prophecy says its where it(civilization) all begin and where it will "end"...(search out ERIDU)
Makes one wonder how in some demented cosmic way, the forces of good and evil may be working in synch on some other level...

I also watched that poll a little while ago, and thought of you. I tried to find it on the CNN site but it wssnt up (yet?), so Im glad you posted that,..thanks

Nope.

It's just like those incomprehensible things in life, like turtles, bats, liquid soap...

ROOTBL (Rolling Over On The Belly Laughing)
(I just made this one up!)

I STARTED ANOTHER THREAD WITH THIS....BUT I GUESS MAYBE IT SHOULD HAVE GONE HERE....ANYWAY...

Okay! *sigh*.....I picked up something else over at the
Spiral Path.....thought I would share it....for those who would like to participate.....
Luv,
Rainbow~

**************************************************************

Urgent Email from Doreen Virtue
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To: "Angel Therapy" <praynwing@aol.com>
From: "Grant Schenk" <praynwing@aol.com>
Subject: An urgent call to peace for the Iraq situation
Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2002 15:05:10 -0700

Dear Lightworkers,

The world needs your help right now, at this very minute, to avoid violence. Last night, the angels awakened me and said that we must each take human steps to avert an invasion into Iraq. I normally don't send out politically involved letters, but the angels are pushing me -- and all of us -- to take immediate action. They said there are many alternative ways to deal with Hussein's nuclear and chemical operations. The U.N. and most western countries are aware of those alternatives, and are resisting the invasion effort.

The angels said that, yes, something must be done in response to Hussein's arsenal-building. However, the angels say that if we invade Iraq, the consequences could be quite dark and violent, as Iraq will retaliate. President Bush will be urging Americans and world leaders toward invasion this week, capitalizing upon the Sept. 11 anniversary emotions.

You can take control of your world, and keep it peaceful and intact for future generations, through these actions: praying without ceasing for peace; through affirming and visualizing a peaceful resolution to the Iraq and middle-east situations; and by voicing your opinions to your political representative and world leaders. Send them your opinions this week, as the invasion is being planned right now.

It will only take five minutes to send an email to your representative, and yet, your letter could make all the difference. Politicians and leaders do listen to voters' opinions, as they're sensitive to re-election implications. Be sure to put, in the email headline, a clear representation of your opinion, such as, "No Iraqi Invasion," or "Opposed to Iraq Invasion," etc., just in case they don't take the time to open and read the email letters.

For your convenience, we've put website links at the end of this letter, that list the email addresses for world leaders and U.S. members of Congress.

Let's all pray, visualize, and speak our opinions together, Lightworkers!

In Peace,

Doreen Virtue, Ph.D. www.angeltherapy.com

Congressional Email Directory www.webslingerz.com/jhoffman/congress-email.html

U.S. Senate www.senate.gov/contacting/index.cfm

Write Your Representative - Contact your Congressperson in the U.S. House of Representatives. www.house.gov/writerep/

USA:President George W. Bush: email president@whitehouse.gov, Fax (202) 456-2461

Secretary of State Colin Powell: email secretary@state.gov , Fax: +1-202-261-8577

United Nations: Kofi Annan, Secretary General: email ecu@un.org

Mary Robinson, High Commissioner for Human Rights: webadmin.hchr@unog.ch

Emailaddresses of worldleaders www.bannister.dk/world.html

Président de la République Française Monsieur Jacques Chirac www.elysee.fr/ecrire/mail_htm

French
Prime Minister Monsieur Lionel Jospin (feedback form)
premier-ministre@premier-ministre.gouv.fr

Germany Federal President, Johannes Rau. Email: posteingang@bundespraesident.de

German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder (feedback form) www.bundesregierung.de/cms-aussen-spezial/layout/lyt/kontaktservice.lyt?global.naviknoten=413

Australian Prime Minister John Howard (feedback form) www.pm.gov.au/your_feedback/feedback.htm

The bomb blasts in Bali....

At least 181 people have been killed in Bali in bomb blasts. These blasts are targeting tourist and business areas,etc...with the majority of fatalities being Australian.
Will this be the event that turns aussies around to seeing Dubyas point of view hence having their support in going into Iraq..in dealing with Al queda,and any other applicable reasons to be at war? CNN just reported theres up to 8 kinds of "terrorist" gangs in the Bali area..most "against the americans"..
Until now, Autralia, like Canada,has always been fairly peaceful as well as unbiased...(in fact,the 2 countries are considered "sister" countries many times.)
And did anyone from Al queda REALLY do this..or is it yet another "pump up" the B**** administration will be using.
Its said right now there are many anti-american protests going on in Bali, and heres yet another nail in the coffin of arabs/muslims and the white nations,as we are being dragged into the slaughter!!

As this is taking place..its been speculated Tarot card users will be pulled into police stations due to the possiblity the sniper in the DC area could be involved in Tarot. Oh gosh...next thing ya know ya'll will be doing tarot readinga in secrecy.
So much going on at the same time..its overwhelming. Oh yea, and one other thing..why does CNN KNOW so much??? Even as they suggest things, they end up happening..and its been this way since 911.

Anyone else smell the FULL force of the NWO as well as an identity mark upon us?
We certainly all decided to incarnate into interesting times indeed..

Does anyone understand the very significant meaning of the following scriptural verse??

.."For God has put it in their hearts to execute His purpose, and by giving their kingdom to the Beast, until the words of God be fulfilled".. Rev. 17:17

Well, you know, this wouldn't be the first time Tarot card readers were arrested ... although you'd have to go back to the middle ages! The foolish thing is that no one who actually knew anything about Tarot would use the Death card as a "signature" for violent killings - the card has nothing to do with violence, and doesn't even really have anything to do with physical death; it's an allegory for transformation! If the killer really IS using this as a calling card, it's just a media stunt by someone who is attracted by the image without knowing anthing about it!

But yes, it's another opportunity to identify another "dangerous minority" whose rights can be safely trampled in the name of security. I think we'll see a lot more "dangerous" beliefs and "subversive" groups and ideas identified in the near future. When a witch-hunt mentality is the order of the day, it's amazing how many innocent-seeming folks will turn out to be witches in disguise!

There's lots going on to yank our chains these days, but the best thing those of us with some calm center remaining can do is to keep it, and speak our peace with balance and sanity to those who will hear. It's going to be increasingly tempting to freak out and start ranting and raving about what's going down as it becomes clearer and clearer ... but you know, ranting and raving is suspiciously witch-like behavior, isn't it?

Love,
Greg

I do not stand in judgment of Prime Minister Tony Blair or President George Bush. I figure that they have more information than I do, and I hope they use it wisely. I have been feeling optimistic lately that we might not go to war with Irag. This tough tough/stance might get Irag to back down and disarm. Hope so. Saddam Hussein is a madman who kills his own people. In a short period, he could take out Israel (a democracy), and pass-off biological weapons to terrorists - entering the US. He hates democracy and is bent on destroying it. Saddam Hussein and George Bush are not the same, and not interchangeable. Let's reverse the two of them. Would you feel comfortable with Saddam Hussein as president of the US, with all of that power behind him? I don't see Bush as evil. He is a terrible communicator, especially compared to Clinton. Our enconomy is in the tank right now. He is disliked in Europe, and I cringe when I hear some of his speeches. I think still think he is an honorable man. That doesn't mean I will necessarily vote for him again. I believe his heart is in the right place, though. Bottom line: Things have changed after the 11th.

Violence Begets Violence I don't think this statement is necessarily true. Back to Hitler. He had no violence directed his way to start getting violent (invasion into Poland). Thank God he was stopped. What would our world be like now, if not? Unfortunately, sometimes peace comes after war.

I understand that most everyone here hates war. I don't want innocent people to die. Sometimes, you have to look at the big picture, though. Young men in this area are signing up for the military. We saw the 11th up close and personal. That must not happen again. Again, I am hoping that Irag will back down. It is very possible.

Joyce

There will be war Joyce..when is the only question. Im assuming you KNOW all the forces are in place waiting for Dubya to give the thumbs up?
Just feel relieved your son is outta there now..Im truly happy for your family!

Saddam and Bush "not the same"..well I happen to think they are twin souls..
Wouldnt want saddam as prez..but certainly not happy with B***, as right now hes the closest thing we have to the anti-christ. Saddams only an insane madman.

For the record..I would NOT want his job..I will give him the benefit of the doubt he thinks hes doing "good". Unfortunately, its his ideas of "good" that are distorted. He knows not what he does. Then again..so much of this is about "greedy white men"...so in that way, yes he does!


Joyce, I sincerely ask you this question..what will it take for you to see what hes doing? Will it take the Mark, where you wont be able to buy or sell anything without it all going thru the government?? Will it take 200 million men and women dying at war as John seen in his Revelation?
If only 195 million die senselessly, over greed,power,money,oil,etc all hidden in the guise of terrorism..does this make John "wrong"... ?

EVERYONE please read this when you have time.
This is getting more and more ridiculous...innocent people are being targeted.
Why has the american public allowed their government to stay in power????? This could be YOU next!
-----------


Concern grows for deported Canadian

By KIM HONEY

Monday, October 14, 2002 &#8211; Print Edition, Page A9


The Council on American-Islamic Relations Canada is demanding Foreign Affairs Minister Bill Graham act swiftly to try to ensure the safety of Ottawa communications engineer Maher Arar.

It is also calling for an investigation into Mr. Arar's "secretive detention, interrogation and deportation" from New York after the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service accused him of having links to al-Qaeda.

Mr. Arar, a Canadian citizen born in Syria, was on his way to Montreal from Tunisia when he made a stopover at New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport on Sept. 26. He was arrested by the INS, questioned for nine hours without a lawyer, jailed for more than two weeks and deported to Syria, all without the knowledge of the Canadian government.

Mr. Arar left his wife and two young children vacationing in Tunisia with in-laws and they have not heard from him since.

"The detention and deportation of Maher Arar is a grave breach of both international human-rights law and Mr. Arar's rights as a Canadian citizen," said Riad Saloojee, a spokesman for the council.

Mr. Saloojee is trying to reach a lawyer who spoke with Mr. Arar "for an hour or two" after his arrest, to see whether any more information can be gleaned about what happened to the Canadian citizen and where he is now.

"It's like pulling teeth from U.S. and Canadian officials, trying to find out what's happening."

Mr. Saloojee suspects Mr. Arar is being held in jail in Syria, and worries he might be treated roughly because he did not complete his mandatory military service before he emigrated to Canada at age 17.

He said Mr. Arar's case has been the subject of "high-level negotiations" between U.S. and Canadian officials.

Mr. Arar's MP, Marlene Catterall, Ottawa West-Nepean, confirmed that senior Canadian officials met with the INS on Friday "trying to get information" about the engineer.

"I frankly am just appalled that the Americans could keep the whereabouts of a Canadian citizen secret from Canadians," Ms. Catterall said yesterday.

No one from the Department of Foreign Affairs was available for comment yesterday. Mr. Arar's wife does not know where her husband is or whether he is safe.

"Every day I hope that maybe he's going to call me, but since Sept. 26th I have heard nothing," she said in a telephone interview yesterday from Tunisia.
--------------

Joyce, I don't stand in judgment of them (Blair and Bush) either. I certainly see the role they are playing in world events in a different light than you do but this is not about blame, and the current leaders are not the cause of this situation, not by a long shot. They are just playing out their roles.

I wish with all my heart I could share your hope that Bush's tough talk will get Saddam to back down and allow unrestricted inspection and that would solve the problem. Or failing that, even that the good guys would charge in and liberate his country, hold free elections, and make the world safe for democracy again. But I don't think any of that is in the cards. I think the immediate objective is to gain control over the middle-east oilfields by the US (or NATO or the Western Alliance, if you prefer, same group these days). And at that point with control of the world's resources and no effective military opposition anywhere in the world, coupled with increasing control of the domestic population with the already rapidly proliferating secret police (er, 'anti-terrorist agencies'), we may suddenly start to open our eyes and say "oops, maybe this isn't the greatest position to be in."

Then again, maybe we won't.

I do remember your view of the world, Joyce, and it makes me feel a warmth for you. I respect where you're coming from and I wish I could share your belief in it, truly I do.

Ah well, Mars square Saturn today, guess I'm feeling its pull.

Love,
Greg

Hello Joyce

I think you have the basics right. We have the whole backdrop of history which shows dictators can't be appeased. Last time we tried that 150,000,000 people lost their lives and the whole of Europe was devastated.

Some will say it's all about oil, some will say the cost is in the loss of civil rights but there is no disputing the US has been attacked. First, the WTC in 1993, then 2 embassies in Africa, then the bombing of the USS Cole in Yemen and finally, the second attack of the WTC. The totality of the US reaction to the previous attacks was to fire off a few cruise missiles at empty terrorist training camps and then declare victory, which only emboldened the terrorists and spurred them to even greater atrocities.

Some here show the ultimate disrespect for the President of the United States, declaring George Bush a buffoon, stupid, a drunk, etc., but in our system of government, there is no doubt George Bush is the President of the United States, duly elected and now carrying out his Constitutional duties to safeguard the United States and it's citizens.

To end the Gulf war and remain in power in Iraq, Saddam signed a series of documents promising to disarm and destroy the chemical weapons he had already used on both Iran and his own citizens. At every point, he lied, stalled and finally refused to permit the inspections called for by the surrender terms.

George W. Bush is a very direct man. What he's calling for now is the enforcement of the UN terms already signed by Iraq for inspections, unfettered inspections of any facilities in Iraq where chemical, biological or nuclear weapons may be stored or developed. Some here see the President's insistence on strict adherence to the UN agreements as unreasonable. Why?

Saddam is also behind the payment of up to $25,000 to families of Palestinian suicide bombers who blow up Israeli civilians. This forum is named the World Community. The real question is, how can we have a truly World Community with madmen like Saddam Hussein and the radical Islamics attempt to spread terror throughout the civilized world?

Some have not listened to what the President said, namely that the civilized nations are in a world wide war with terrorist organizations. And it doesn't make any difference if they are Islamics, homegrown or any other persuasion. They oppose the rule of law and attempt to impose their beliefs on others---and if you refuse to believe as they do, you are the enemy and they are permitted to kill you with impunity.

I think your position is correct and refreshing.

jwhop

jwhop, you are so refreshing and I love reading what you write.

I tend to shy away from political discussions, don't feel I am informed enough.

But, I know what I like, and I happen to be one that likes George Bush, heck, I voted for him and I am not ashamed to admit that!!

Leo is honest, Leo tells it like it is, Leo is direct, well that is a Fire sign trait, so the other Fire signs will be the same way, just express is less dramatic.

If you were teaching a course in Political Science, I would sign up, because you are the first person to actually make politics interesting to me.

Donna

If one limits their memberships of humanity to small worldly organizations to spear head their desired policies for the purpose of making them more powerful, more important, wealthier, or safer (from other groups) then we of America can most certainly accomplish that goal as we (the American Federal Government) have the resources, the might, the anxieties, the predjustist and the ignorance (of the rest of the world) to most assuredly take over the entire world. And even if we did, the current model is only serving the needs (or wants and desires) of about 30% of the population with the rest in a rather static mundane life style costing hundreds of times more to maintain than the citizens of the United Nations. And even if we reorganized the funding and services to be distributed more fairly, and even if we had leaders (and corporate officers) that were concerned for the people of America, the world, and cared about the Earth, the model of capitalism, democracy (a republic of well to doers vs. an educated populace of high morals and sound believes in a God or higher power), these principles could not be proliferated across the planet to states and countries that do not have them.

But even if we could, there would be a major set of people, possibly more than half of the world, that would be worst off than they are now and half better off than they are now.
And this is how the power and resources would continue, redistributed among fractions of organized memberships of fear based, advantage motivated, and dogma indoctirenated ideals.

So one needs to step out of the world into the spiritual realm where there is no death and life continues on forever, even to the point where we may be on another physical place from life to life, and ask one self to which organized membership does one really belong.
One can then see that anything less than the Grandness of scale is nothing but our weakness showing through in the form of fear. Fear being the denial of the truth of what's bigger than our minds can comprehend.

I have no President, no representatives, and no politics that engage in anything less than what I can comprehend. I comprehend much, I fail to comprehend much more, but I can say without a doubt, war and its practice is a very low tech method of the development of humanity and serves a small fraction of the people of this planet.

It would be better to flood Iraq will solar power and TV's than bombs and armies.
In a few years the people of Iraq would want so much more than Saddam or any other self-absorbed lunatic. In that way, Bush is exactly like him. But it is we that are the problem. We are very fearful and ignorant and lack the faith to comprehend the truth beyond our little windows. One guy with a gun has paralyzed the East Coast with fear. How much denial do you need? Two buildings fall down and everyone stops working.
One TV commercial and everyone runs out and eats tacos. And we are supposed to tell other countries how to live?

Love and Beyond,
Darwin

hi Darwin...its all such a horrible sad state of affairs. Today the news showed/interviewed many service men and women ready to ship out...I just wanted to cry as I felt the energy of so many not returning.

However..Im sorry I had to crack right up with your last comment there..thanks~needed the laugh!!

If we weren't sleepwalking we wouldn't need to wake up.

Love,
Greg

Hi Donna

I doubt you'll be seeing me within the hallowed walls of ivy teaching Poly Sci anytime soon My view of the world is anathema to the pseudo academic establishment currently in power in academia.

I'm not surprised you like George W Bush. He has high approval ratings and most people do, including lots of Democrats and that scares the hell out of the Democrat establishment types. I would say its W who's refreshing.

I'm with you Donna and usually try to avoid political discussions.

jwhop

Hey Darwin

You may have something there. Perhaps we're trying to do this the hard way. Maybe we should be offering a free TV and satellite service for every Iraqi. American capitalism would soon bring them to their knees.

Either that or load those B-1, B-17 and B-52 bombers with Taco Bell tacos and let them fly. Oh yeah, extra hot sauce, of course.

jwhop

Jwhop I'm far from a "Democratic establishment type" but Bush scares the hell out of me! Iraq aside, we have seen more of our constitutionally guaranteed civil rights fall by the wayside under the guise of the "war on terrorism" under this administration than any any other in the history of our nation, whether left-leaning paternalistic or right-leaning "pro-business"/militaristic. We have seen the introduction of vast new bureacratic secret police powers under the sole direction of the executive branch of government -- one of the deepest fears of America's founding fathers -- along with secret arrests and interrogations and indefinite detainments of "suspects" on grounds that need not be revealed to ANYONE, without legal representation or access to legal appeal whatsoever. We have seen the Freedom of Information act effectively gutted, with basically ALL presidential communications sealed from public review. We have seen the issuance of soul-stirring declarations of "national mission" that effectively amount to the assertion of unilateral US right to "compel" all foreign governments to embrace "freedom" (remember when freedom and compulsion used to mean different things?), including the "globalization" schemes first touted by Bush the Elder under the name "New World Order" (although no one in power uses that term any more because it has bad PR connotations) which purport to foster "free trade" but which actually establish a technocratic mercantilism in which select multinational corporations are granted governmental charters to "develop" underprivileged countries in a thinly-veiled scam to gain control of their natural resources and economic systems.

All of this amounts to a lot of patriotic-sounding WORDS that sound as good to me as they do to you or to ANYONE who values the genuinely decmocratic traditions of America -- but which in fact are profoundly antithetical to everything our founding fathers and constitutional traditions genuinely stand for.

This is the classic "doublespeak" of Orwell's "1984" where words no longer have any objective meaning but are used simply as propaganda tools to ease acceptance of Big Brother's agenda.

Yes, you bet he scares the hell out of me. But it's not a partisan fear, I'm under no illusions that the Democrats would be any less opressive, they'd just couch their furtherance of the same agenda in different terms with different emphasis to make us feel like there's a real choice in the matter. Clinton's usurpation of civil rights and expansion of Federal power was nearly as frightening as Bush's, it just wasn't quite as visible because he didn't have the grand theater of this war on terrorism to operate within. The fact is that this country is now largely in the hands of a group of folks who are dominated by multinational corporate and financial interests supported by an interlocking network of intelligence agencies and "global planning" institutions, whose aim is to establish an authoritarian world government, pure and simple. Getting caught up in the "politics" of it and arguing about Republicans versus Democrats, or thinking that this is all about whether "Bush" is an effective leader or a scoundrel, just distracts our attention from what's really going on. And they are doing a great job of that distraction.

Love,
Greg

Its great to see it all being put together that way Greg..thanks.

And while people are debating whether they are for or against Bush,not to mention getting suckered in by other events taking place..did anyone notice he signed a declaration today "authorizing" him to go to war with Iraq. Nothing much left to do now but start the war game.
As you said Greg...they are doing a wonderful job with distractions.

---------
Bush signs war resolution

Associated Press


Washington: U.S. President Bush on Wednesday signed Congress' war-making resolution and told wary world leaders to "face up to our global responsibility" to confront Saddam Hussein.

-------
Heres CNNs version..
http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/10/16/bush.resolution/index.html

-----
And on another note...ALL the population of Iraq (11 million) voted in Saddam as their leader for another ..*gulp*..7 year term. Mind you, he was the soul candidate!
http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/10/16/iraq.elections.ap/index.html

Greg

The Democrats aren't overly concerned about the President's policy on Iraq or the war on terrorism. What scares the hell out of them is the likely loss of the Senate in the coming election coupled with the likely list of possible Democrat candidates for President in the 2004 elections and the fact they are no match for George W. Bush. None of their ideas are getting any traction with the voting public and the President has far higher job approval ratings than the House Minority Leader and the Majority Leader of the Senate combined, both of which are probable candidates for the Presidency in 2004.

What we are seeing is a reorganization of security functions already in place in the Federal Government. Elements of several departments will be combined into a Homeland Security Dept.

I'm not aware any US citizen has lost any civil rights as a result of the Bill to authorize the Homeland Security Dept.

What civil rights do US citizens not have now that they had prior to President Bush taking office in 2001?

The INS has always had the authority to arrest and hold people in the United States illegally for what ever reason, whether they had snuck into the country, failed to return home when their visa expired or were not enrolled in school when on an educational visa. They also have and have had the authority to hold without bail, counsel or resort to the courts those aliens in the country for the purpose of making war on the US. So, what do you think has changed?

The United States has the right to set immigration policy and enforce immigration laws. It's indisputable there are millions of persons in the US illegally, some of them have proven to be terrorists themselves or are here specifically to funnel money and information to terrorist organizations.
These people are not covered by the usual civil rights accorded citizens of the US. They have been a source of information on terrorist organizations. Some are here on legal visas and some have been arrested and questioned. Some have been released and others are in the process of having charges brought against them. Even a naturalized citizen can have their citizenship revoked if they obtained it under false pretenses--such as gaining citizenship to help other nations or groups make war on the US.

In contrast, John Walker Lindh is a US citizen with all his civil rights intact. He was indicted and prosecuted under our laws, had all his rights observed including counsel, his day in court etc.

I'll be interested to see which civil rights citizens of the US have lost as a result of George Bush's policies.

jwhop

ho jwhop..I did a real quick search..typed in "loss of civil rights since sept 11" and the first site that came up had this to say...(and its all true,as anyone will know whos been following the news)

Relax restrictions on information sharing between law enforcement and intelligence agencies
Authorize "roving wiretaps"
Allowing detention of non-citizens for up to seven days without charges
Expand police access to e-mail records
Increase government monitoring of financial transactions
Permit law-enforcement access to library and bookstore records -- and forbid the disclosure of such inquiries
from..
http://civilliberty.about.com/library/weekly/aa082902a.htm

you may want to start sticking your earnings in a sock in the back yard before they start to take it all in the guise to "fight terrorism"..as thats coming to a bank near you very soon..The army doesnt have a lot of money left. You may also want to kiss your pensions and rrsps goodbye. If you've already signed up for direct deposits,bank cards,etc, you're half way there...congratulations!!
But thats ok,as it sounds like you support war and B***...

Aries
These are the amendments to the US Constitution.
Your arguments lack merit. The Constitution can only be changed by amendment. Not the President, not the Congress and not the Supreme Court can alter or abolish a single word or a single civil right contained therein.

There is nothing violative of civil rights in the items you mentioned. Here are the major parts of the Act.

Major provisions of the U.S.A. Patriot Act, passed in October 2001, include:

-- Relaxed restrictions on information sharing between U.S. law enforcement and intelligence officers about suspected terrorists. -- Makes it illegal to knowingly harbor a terrorist. Law enforcement and intelligence services should share information. Nothing else makes sense given that intelligence services are not authorized to conduct intelligence operations on American soil.

-- Authorization of "roving wiretaps," so that law enforcement officials can get court orders to wiretap any phone a suspected terrorist would use. The provision was needed, advocates said, with the advent of cellular and disposable phones. Notice the provision for court orders to wiretap. Wiretaps are always pursuant to court orders

-- Allowing the federal government to detain non-U.S. citizens suspected of terrorism for up to seven days without specific charges. The administration originally wanted to hold them indefinitely. Non citizens are not now and never have been covered by the array of civil rights available to US Citizens nor should they be and especially those in the country illegally. The law of Habeas Corpus applies to US citizens.

-- Allowing law enforcement officials greater subpoena power for e-mail records of terrorist suspects. The subpoena power has always been available to prosecutors and litigants as an extension of the civil and criminal courts

-- Tripling the number of Border Patrol, Customs Service Inspectors and Immigration and Naturalization Service inspectors at the northern border of the United States, and providing $100 million to improve technology and equipment on the U.S. border with Canada. So what? The US has the right to inspect, control and monitor the borders of the United States and always has had.

-- Expanding measures against money laundering by requiring additional record keeping and reports for certain transactions and requiring identification of account holders. What's new here? The government has always had the right to inspect bank records of account holders pursuant to a court order.

-- Eliminating the statute of limitations for prosecuting the most egregious terrorist acts, but maintaining the statute of limitation on most crimes at five to eight years. Statute of limitations are set by different states as well as the Federal Government and lengthening or shortening them has nothing to do with civil right



Constitutional Amendments 1-10: The Bill of Rights

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment III

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment VII

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.


----------------------------