War Without End

Alpha · Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2003 7:59 pm Post subject: US Browbeating Mexico

03/06/03

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/07/opinion/07KRUG.html

New York Times 3/7/03

[Bush Alienates Mexico]

Let Them Hate as Long as They Fear
By PAUL KRUGMAN

Why does our president condone the swaggering and contemptuous approach to
our friends and allies this administration is fostering, including among
its most senior officials? Has 'oderint dum metuant' really become our
motto?" So reads the resignation letter of John Brady Kiesling, a career
diplomat who recently left the Foreign Service in protest against Bush
administration policy.

"Oderint dum metuant" translates, roughly, as "let them hate as long as
they fear." It was a favorite saying of the emperor Caligula, and may seem
over the top as a description of current U.S. policy. But this week's
crisis in U.S.-Mexican relations a crisis that has been almost ignored
north of the border suggests that it is a perfect description of George
Bush's attitude toward the world.

Mexico is an enormously important ally, not just because of our common
border, but also because of its special role as a showcase for American
ideals. For a century and a half Mexico has often with good reason seen
its powerful neighbor as an exploiter, if not an outright enemy. Since the
first Bush administration, however, the United States has made great
efforts to treat Mexico as a partner, and Mexico's recent track record of
economic stability and democracy is, and should be, a source of pride on
both sides of the border.

But Mexico's seat on the U.N. Security Council gives it a vote on the
question of Iraq and the threats the Bush administration has made to get
that vote are quickly destroying any semblance of good will.

Last week The Economist quoted an American diplomat who warned that if
Mexico didn't vote for a U.S. resolution it could "stir up feelings"
against Mexicans in the United States. He compared the situation to that of
Japanese-Americans who were interned after 1941, and wondered whether
Mexico "wants to stir the fires of jingoism during a war."

Incredible stuff, but easy to dismiss as long as the diplomat was
unidentified. Then came President Bush's Monday interview with Copley News
Service. He alluded to the possibility of reprisals if Mexico didn't vote
America's way, saying, "I don't expect there to be significant retribution
from the government" emphasizing the word "government." He then went on to
suggest that there might, however, be a reaction from other quarters,
citing "an interesting phenomena taking place here in America about the
French . . . a backlash against the French, not stirred up by anybody
except the people."

And Mr. Bush then said that if Mexico or other countries oppose the United
States, "there will be a certain sense of discipline."

These remarks went virtually unreported by the ever-protective U.S. media,
but they created a political firestorm in Mexico. The White House has been
frantically backpedaling, claiming that when Mr. Bush talked of
"discipline" he wasn't making a threat. But in the context of the rest of
the interview, it's clear that he was.

Moreover, Mr. Bush was disingenuous when he described the backlash against
the French as "not stirred up by anybody except the people." On the same
day that the report of his interview appeared, The Financial Times carried
the headline, "Hastert Orchestrates Tirade Against the French." That's
Dennis Hastert, the speaker of the House of Representatives. In fact,
anti-French feeling has been carefully fomented by Republican officials,
Rupert Murdoch's media empire and other administration allies. Can you
blame Mexicans for interpreting Mr. Bush's remarks as a threat to do the
same to them?

So oderint dum metuant it is. I could talk about the foolishness of such
blatant bullying or about the incredible risks, in a multiethnic,
multiracial society, of even hinting that one might encourage a backlash
against Hispanics. And yes, I mean Hispanics, not Mexicans: once feelings
are running high, do you really think people will politely ask a
brown-skinned guy with an accent whether he is a citizen or, if not, which
country he comes from?

But my most intense reaction to this story isn't anger over the
administration's stupidity and irresponsibility, or even dismay over the
casual destruction of hard-won friendships. No, when I read an interview in
which the U.S. president sounds for all the world like a B-movie
villain "You have relatives in Texas, yes?" what I feel, above all, is shame.

Alpha · Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2003 11:30 pm Post subject: HELP!: Impeach Bush

----- Original Message -----
From: Boyle, Francis

Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 12:03 PM
Subject: FW: HELP!: Impeach Bush
Importance: High

Dear Colleagues:
Several Members of Congress are on the brink of putting these draft
Bills of Impeachment into the House against Bush, Cheney and Ashcroft. We do
not have much time before this war starts. I would ask you all to contact
your own MOC and ask him/her to put these Bills in. Also, if you have any
personal contacts with MOCs and their staffers, please use them. I am
standing by here to give free Counsel to them all. Thanks. Francis.

Copyright 2003 States News Service
States News Service March 5, 2003 Wednesday
HEADLINE: Congressional Democrats Looking to Impeach Bush
BYLINE: By David Enrich States News Service

DATELINE: WASHINGTON BODY: Ever since President Bush's controversial victory
in the 2000 election, die-hard Democrats have dreamed of impeaching the
president. Now some Democrats in Congress are preparing to do exactly that
-- introduce articles of impeachment against Bush and perhaps members of his
Cabinet, according to lawmakers and congressional aides. Over the past few
weeks, some of the most liberal members of the House have discussed the
possibility of impeaching Bush. Talks have intensified this week, lawmakers
say, largely because war with Iraq appears imminent. At least one senior
House Democrat has produced a draft impeachment resolution. It accuses Bush,
Vice President Dick Cheney and Attorney General John Ashcroft of more than a
dozen "high crimes and misdemeanors," including bombing civilians in
Afghanistan, constitutional violations in the domestic war on terrorism, and
"threatening the independence and sovereignty of Iraq." Rep. Danny K. Davis,
a Chicago Democrat who has discussed impeachment with his colleagues in the
congressional black and progressive caucuses, said an impeachment resolution
probably would be introduced in the event of "a full-fledged military
effort" that occurs without new congressional war resolutions. The House and
Senate last year overwhelmingly authorized the use of force against Iraq if
it does not comply with United Nations disarmament resolutions. "There are
some [lawmakers] who obviously are more eager to jump hard, and then there
are others who probably aren't even thinking this way at all" about
impeachment, Davis said. "I'd probably be in the middle." White House
spokesman Scott Stanzel said he had no comment on the impeachment
resolutions that are under discussion. Some lawmakers and aides who are
involved with the drafting of impeachment resolutions say they don't expect
to actually impeach the president. Instead, they say their goal is to
express their outrage with the administration's foreign and domestic
policies. While only two presidents -- Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton --
have ever been impeached, congressional resolutions outlining articles of
impeachment are less rare. Sometimes they are introduced for purely
political reasons, said Stephen Hess, a senior fellow at the nonpartisan
Brookings Institution. "I'd consider this one on the frivolous side," Hess
said. "Impeachment is not the appropriate vehicle for political
argumentation, and that's what this is." Among the most vocal proponents of
impeaching Bush are former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark and Francis A.
Boyle, a law professor at the University of Illinois. They both helped craft
an impeachment resolution that was introduced in Congress against the elder
President Bush on the eve of the first Gulf War. Working independently,
Clark and Boyle say they have distributed sample impeachment resolutions to
small groups of antiwar Democratic lawmakers and their aides. They say they
expect at least one lawmaker to introduce an impeachment resolution in the
House. "It's under active review by several members of Congress," Boyle
said. "It's going to take someone with courage, integrity and a safe seat to
do this." Few Democrats involved in the impeachment discussions will talk
about them publicly. Rep. Maxine Waters of Los Angeles would say only that
she and other members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus are
"considering a lot of different strategies ... by which to create a real
voice of opposition to war." "The evidence of an imperial presidency almost
grows daily," said another Democratic lawmaker, who said he would vote to
impeach Bush. Other Democrats say they have rejected entreaties to join the
impeachment campaign. "I'm not interested. I think it would be destructive
for this country. This country needs healing, and that's why I'm running for
president," said Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich of Cleveland, the Progressive
Caucus chairman. Boyle said Kucinich's refusal to be involved in the
impeachment planning was politically motivated. "I think Kucinich might have
done it if he had not decided to run for president," Boyle said. "I guess he
concluded that might hurt his run for president." But Kucinich is not the
only antiwar Democrat steering clear of impeachment. "There have been people
asking, and I have so far declined," said Rep. Jim McDermott of Washington,
who was widely condemned last year for visiting Iraq. "It's really premature
until we go to war. Then we'll have to see." "I think impeachment is a
distraction, but I do respect my colleagues who believe that is the way to
go," said Rep. Marcy Kaptur of Toledo. "I think it demonstrates the angst of
the members of Congress who have watched the of this administration's
policies."

Impeachment Resolution Against President George W. Bush

by

Francis A. Boyle

Professor of Law

January 17, 2003

108th Congress H.Res.XX

1st Session

Impeaching George Walker Bush, President of the United States, of high
crimes and misdemeanors.

_______________________________________________

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January __, 2003

Mr./Ms. Y submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the
Committee on Judiciary.

________________________________________________

A RESOLUTION

Impeaching George Walker Bush, President of the United States, of high
crimes and misdemeanors.

Impeaching George Walker Bush, President of the United States, of high
crimes and misdemeanors.

Resolved, That George Walker Bush, President of the United States is
impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following articles
of impeachment be exhibited to the Senate:

Articles of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives of the
United States of America in the name of itself and of all of the people of
the United States of America, against George Walker Bush, President of the
United States of America, in maintenance and support of its impeachment
against him for high crimes and misdemeanors.

ARTICLE I

In the conduct of the office of President of the United States, George
Walker Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute
the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his
ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United
States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the
laws be faithfully executed, has attempted to impose a police state and a
military dictatorship upon the people and Republic of the United States of
America by means of "a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations" against the
Constitution since September 11, 2001. This subversive conduct includes but
is not limited to trying to suspend the constitutional Writ of Habeas
Corpus; ramming the totalitarian U.S.A. Patriot Act through Congress; the
mass-round-up and incarceration of foreigners; kangaroo courts; depriving at
least two United States citizens of their constitutional rights by means of
military incarceration; interference with the constitutional right of
defendants in criminal cases to lawyers; violating and subverting the Posse
Comitatus Act; unlawful and unreasonable searches and seizures; violating
the First Amendments rights of the free exercise of religion, freedom of
speech, peaceable assembly, and to petition the government for redress of
grievances; packing the federal judiciary with hand-picked judges belonging
to the totalitarian Federalist Society and undermining the judicial
independence of the Constitution's Article III federal court system;
violating the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions and the U.S. War Crimes
Act; violating the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and
the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial
Discrimination; reinstitution of the infamous "Cointelpro" Program;
violating the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, the Convention
against Torture, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; instituting
the totalitarian Total Information Awareness Program; and establishing a
totalitarian Northern Military Command for the United States of America
itself. In all of this George Walker Bush has acted in a manner contrary to
his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the
great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury
of the people of the United States.

Wherefore George Walker Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and
trial, and removal from office.

ARTICLE II

In the conduct of the office of President of the United States, George
Walker Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute
the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his
ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United
States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the
laws be faithfully executed, has violated the Equal Protection Clause of the
Constitution. U.S. soldiers in the Middle East are overwhelmingly poor
White, Black, and Latino and their military service is based on the coercion
of a system that has denied viable economic opportunities to these classes
of citizens. Under the Constitution, all classes of citizens are guaranteed
equal protection of the laws, and calling on the poor and minorities to
fight a war for oil to preserve the lifestyles of the wealthy power elite of
this country is a denial of the rights of these soldiers. In all of this
George Walker Bush has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President
and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the
cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the
United States.

Wherefore George Walker Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and
trial, and removal from office.

ARTICLE III

In the conduct of the office of President of the United States, George
Walker Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute
the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his
ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United
States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the
laws be faithfully executed, has violated the U.S. Constitution, federal
law, and the United Nations Charter by bribing, intimidating and threatening
others, including the members of the United Nations Security Council, to
support belligerent acts against Iraq. In all of this George Walker Bush has
acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of
constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and
justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.

Wherefore George Walker Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and
trial, and removal from office.

ARTICLE IV

In the conduct of the office of President of the United States, George
Walker Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute
the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his
ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United
States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the
laws be faithfully executed, has prepared, planned, and conspired to engage
in a massive war and catastrophic aggression against Iraq by employing
methods of mass destruction that will result in the killing of hundreds of
thousands of civilians, many of whom will be children. This planning
includes the threatened use of nuclear weapons, and the use of such
indiscriminate weapons and massive killings by aerial bombardment, or
otherwise, of civilians, violates the Hague Regulations on land warfare, the
rules of customary international law set forth in the Hague Rules of Air
Warfare, the Four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and Protocol I thereto, the
Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles, the Genocide Convention, the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and U.S. Army Field Manual 27-10
(1956). In all of this George Walker Bush has acted in a manner contrary to
his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the
great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury
of the people of the United States.

Wherefore George Walker Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and
trial, and removal from office.

ARTICLE V

In the conduct of the office of President of the United States, George
Walker Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute
the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his
ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United
States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the
laws be faithfully executed, has committed the United States to acts of war
without congressional consent and contrary to the United Nations Charter and
international law. From September, 2001 through January, 2003, the President
embarked on a course of action that systematically eliminated every option
for peaceful resolution of the Persian Gulf crisis. Once the President
approached Congress for consent to war, tens of thousands of American
soldiers' lives were in jeopardy - rendering any substantive debate by
Congress meaningless. The President has not received a Declaration of War by
Congress, and in contravention of the written word, the spirit, and the
intent of the U.S. Constitution has declared that he will go to war
regardless of the views of the American people. In failing to seek and
obtain a Declaration of War, George Walker Bush has acted in a manner
contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional
government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to
the manifest injury of the people of the United States.

Wherefore George Walker Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and
trial, and removal from office.

ARTICLE VI

In the conduct of the office of President of the United States, George
Walker Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute
the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his
ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United
States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the
laws be faithfully executed, has planned, prepared, and conspired to commit
crimes against the peace by leading the United States into aggressive war
against Iraq in violation of Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter, the
Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles, the Kellogg-Brand Pact, U.S.
Army Field Manual 27-10 (1956), numerous other international treaties and
agreements, and the Constitution of the United States. In all of this George
Walker Bush has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and
subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause
of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United
States.

Wherefore George Walker Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and
trial, and removal from office.

(In memory of Congressman Henry B. Gonzalez - R.I.P. - and H. Res. 34/ 86,
102nd Cong., 1st Sess., Jan. 16, 1991.)
Francis A. Boyle
Law Building
504 E. Pennsylvania Ave.
Champaign, IL 61820 USA
217-333-7954(voice)
217-244-1478(fax)
fboyle@law.uiuc.edu
(personal comments only)

Alpha

The Muslim International Newsletter
-- from Dr. Amir Ali -- amirali@ilaam.net
Unsubscribe: http://www.ilaam.net/unsub.asp?t=3B8BA3D77E2
Subscribe: http://www.ilaam.net/sub.asp

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

War on Iraq New Crusade: Islamic Scholars, Intellectuals

by Mohammad Gamal Arafa, Islam-Online Staff

CAIRO, November 21 (IslamOnline) - Hundreds of scholars and intellectuals from Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Egypt, Morocco, Algeria and Yemen condemned continued American threats to use force against 12-year-sanction-hit Iraq.

The U.S. assault on the countries of the region recalls to mind the Crusades of the Middle Ages and the era of colonialism in the modern age, they stressed, highlighting mounting U.S. threats despite the revival of inspections in Iraq.

In a joint statement, the scholars, including Sheikh Youssef el-Qaradawi, Sheikh Abdl el-Majid el-Zandani, Sheikh Salman Fahd el-Ouda, Tareg el-Bishri, Dr. Essam el-Bashir, Dr. Ahmed el-Raisoni, El-Habr Bour el-Dayim and Abdl el-Rahman Suar el-Zahab, cited developments in Afghanistan, Palestine, Iraq and Sudan.

This is just a small portion of clandestine American strategies and intentions towards Islamic countries, they underlined.

The statement, posted on www.sawtna.com, called on Arab governments to defy the U.S. campaign and Zionist powers propagating new forms of colonialism and hegemony with the aim of applying them on several Islamic countries.

"The U.S. administration's insistence on using force against Iraq and attacking countries of the region brings to the minds crusade campaigns and colonialism when colonial armies invaded Asia and Africa, enslaving peoples and stealing their wealth," the statement averred.

"That dreadful era invited Jihad [struggle] and legitimate resistance and ended with the defeat of the evil forces of the invading crusaders. Therefore, any aggression on the nation will open the doors for Jihad and legitimate resistance that will also end, Allah willing, with the defeat of the invading crusaders and Zionist powers of evil," stressed the statement.

The scholars and intellectuals asserted that among "the motives of the U.S. administration to strike Iraq and tamper with the security of the Arab region is to wipe out the Islamic identity of the nation; imposing American culture in the region; controlling the nation's oil and other riches; covering up its failure in achieving the announced objectives of its campaign in Afghanistan; igniting the region with more tension, dodging development efforts; protecting Israel and Israeli superiority and cracking down on the blessed Palestinian Intifada which has strongly shaken and destabilized Israel."

The statement specified several steps exhorting governments, peoples and scholars, separately, to defy the vicious American campaign.

They urged Arab and Islamic governments to integrate with their peoples to reinforce the spirit of confidence and the principle of shura (consulting with others).

The statement warned Arab governments against standing with the U.S. administration, adopting its policies or even standing hand-folded vis-a-vis its aggressions.

It also pressed governments to dodge division, disagreement and difference deliberately planted by the enemy between governments and peoples.

The statement called on all parties (governments and peoples) to build institutions, diversify income resources and consolidate economic and social ties.

On the other side, the statement appealed to Arab and Islamic peoples to return to Almighty Allah, abide by the Islamic Shari’a (law), repent sins, close ranks, unify forces, put the interests of the nation before those of individuals and be certain of victory with the help of Allah.

It called on "Muslim youth" to give priority to the supreme interests of the nation, avoid violence and help maintain the security and unity of their countries.

The enemy is waylaying for any chance or row (to attack Arab and Islamic countries) and we should not give it such an opportunity, the scholars stressed.

The statement exhorted scholars, preachers and intellectuals to steer the nation during time of crisis, to help awaken the people with what is right, to promote modernity and tolerance based on the correct understanding of the message of Islam and to defend Islamic causes.

Concluding, the statement appealed to justice and peace loving advocates across the globe, whether governments, organizations, groups or individuals, to use all possible means to protest the policies of the U.S. administration, which jeopardize security and stability of the region.

http://www.islam-online.net/english/news/2002-11/21/article22.shtml

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

For this and other articles please visit Dr. Amir Ali's article collection at http://www.ilaam.net. Dr. Amir Ali may be reached at amirali@ilaam.net.

HELP REQUESTED:

If you like the work of Dr. Amir Ali you are requested to support the following Da'wah organization financially by sending your donation in any amount in U.S. dollars to:

The Institute of Islamic Information and Education
P.O. Box 410129
Chicago, IL 60641-0129
U.S.A.

Alternately, please go the III&E web site at http://www.iiie.net/Main/HelpDawah.html

For publications of the Institute visit http://www.iiie.net.

Views articulated in the articles circulated by Dr. Amir Ali are not necessarily representative of the Institute of Islamic Information and Education (III&E) or its Board of Trustees, Board of Directors, employees or volunteers.

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

You are subscribed as aliajafari369@yahoo.com.

This is an automatically generated email. If you do not want to receive further emails from this list, please go to the UNSUBSCRIBE link below, which will take you to the web page where you can delete your name from the list.

To UNSUBSCRIBE, go to this web page:
http://www.ilaam.net/unsub.asp?t=3B8BA3D77E2

To change your email address or text format, go to this web page:
http://www.ilaam.net/unsub.asp?t=3B8BA3D77E2

To subscribe, go to this web page:
http://www.ilaam.net/sub.asp

Alpha

http://rense.com/general35/hali.htm

Alpha · Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2003 9:56 pm Post subject: Why is Cheney on JINSA board?

Subj: Why is Cheney on JINSA board?

PNAC/JINSA Cabal has Hijacked Bush Regime and is PUSHING US to WAR:

http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2003/03/07/pnac-jinsa-cabal-pushing-us-to-war-on-abc-nightlin.php

Why is V.P., Dick Cheney a board member of "The Jewish
Institute of National Security" (JINSA)?

Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs

Basic Information

http://www.just-tzedakah.org/reports/JewishInstituteforNationalSecurityAffairs/basicinfo.html

1779 Massachusetts Ave., NW Suite 515
Washington DC 20036
(202) 667-3900; Fax (202) 667-0601
Internet: www.jinsa.org E-mal info@jinsa.org

The Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA) was
founded in 1976 to educate Americans about the value of the US-Israel
security relationship.

OBSERVANCE

No JINSA activities are conducted on Shabbat or Jewish holidays.
Food is Kosher or dairy.

ENDORSEMENTS, SUPPORTERS, AND AWARDS

The JINSA Board of Advisers consists of

John Bolton M. Gen. Jarvis Lynch USMC (Ret.)
Dr. Stephen Bryen Hon. Dave McCurdy
Hon Dick Cheney Dr. Joshua Muravchik
Dr. Anthony Cordesman Hon. Richard Perle
Adm. Leon Edney USN (Ret.) Lt. Gen. John Pustay USAF (Ret.)
Gen. John Foss USA (Ret.) Prof. Eugene Rostow
Richard Fox Gen. Crosbie Saint USA (Ret.)
Hon. Frank Hoeber R. Adm. Sumner Shapiro USN (Ret.)
Adm. Jerome Johnson USN (Ret.) Prof. David Sidorsky
Phyllis Kaminsky Dr. John Silber
Amb. Max M. Kampleman Gen.. Lawrence A. Skantze USAF
(Ret.)
V. Adm. B. Kauderer USN (Ret.) Kenneth R. Timmerman
Lt. Gen. Robert Kelley USAF (Ret.) Jacques Torczyner
Hon. Jack Kemp Adm. Carlisle Trost USN (Ret.)
Dr. Jeane J. Kirkpatrick Col. Bruce Williams USA (Ret.)
Prof. Michael Ledeen Hon. James Woolsey

Tevet 5759; January 1999

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

Giving opportunities:

General:
Giving Certificates
eTzedakah: The Electronic Tzedakah Box

I would like to contribute $ to the Jewish Institute for National
Security Affairs.

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

--
Peter Myers, 21 Blair St, Watson ACT 2602, Australia
http://users.cyberone.com.au/myers ph +61 2 62475187
to unsubscribe, reply with "unsubscribe" in the subject line

PNAC/JINSA Cabal has Hijacked Bush Regime and is PUSHING US to WAR:

http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2003/03/07/pnac-jinsa-cabal-pushing-us-to-war-on-abc-nightlin.php

Alpha · Posted: Sun Mar 09, 2003 4:41 am Post subject: The FlimFlam...

http://reese.king-online.com/Reese_20030305/index.php

Alabaster

...more Americans really should know about the impact of Israeli, Jewish American and Israel-First policy institutes on American foreign policy in the Middle East.

They simply wouldn't believe it.

People like Defense Policy Board Chairman, Richard Perle, and U.S. Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, Douglas Feith should likely be tried and perhaps even executed for treason due to their obvious involvements in the direct affairs of a foreign power, namely Israel, in view of its relation to the tragedy of 9-11.

Both of these men are activist Zionist Jews with extremely strong ties to Israel. Perle is the Director of the Jerusalem Post and along with Feith, co-authored an Israeli military strategic document for the Israeli policy institute, The Institute for Advanced Political and Strategic Studies in 1996 which ultimately reinstituted the standby Israeli plan of divide and conquer along internal ethnic lines which Israel Shahak so clearly demonstrated in his translation of Oded Yinon's paper entitled "The Zionist Plan for the Middle East."

If you want to see the blueprints for the "War on Terrorism" (The War for Israel) written at least 10 years before 9-11, simply review the policy documents for the key Israeli, Jewish and Israel-First thinktanks and policy groups--it's all there, every bit of it.

Hunni

War Without End

The global war against terror, news about the illegal invasion of Iraq, the corporate puppet presidents, the war criminal Tony Blair, September 11th 2001, the USS Liberty and New World Order crimes against humanity.

PNAC (JINSA) Cabal (PUSHING US to WAR) on ABC "Nightlin - page 2