Saturday, February 26, 2005

The further back we go, the less we move forward 

OK, now the top article on Reuters.com is focused on a meeting in 1987 between Pakistani nuclear scientists and Iranian government personnel:

Investigators have found evidence of a meeting 18 years ago between Iranian officials and associates of the scientist dubbed the father of Pakistan's nuclear program that resulted in a written offer to supply Tehran with the makings of a nuclear weapons program, The Washington Post reported in its Sunday edition. Citing unnamed foreign diplomats and U.S. officials, The Post said the secret 1987 meeting in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, between Iranian officials and Abdul Qadeer Khan's associates started both Iran's nuclear efforts and Khan's black market.

Iran, according to the newspaper, bought centrifuge designs and a starter kit for uranium enrichment. While Iran recently told the International Atomic Energy Agency it turned down the chance to buy the more sensitive equipment required for building the core of a bomb, there is evidence the country used Khan's offer as a guide to acquire some of the pricier items elsewhere, the newspaper said. It quoted an unnamed Western diplomat as saying the offer was the "strongest indication to date that Iran had a nuclear weapons program, but it doesn't prove it completely."

The newspaper said much of the equipment Iran obtained could be used for peaceful purposes and is scattered throughout Iran's energy program. The United States has accused Iran of secretly pursuing an atomic weapons program under the cover of its nuclear energy program. Tehran, however, insists its nuclear activities are focused on producing energy.

Let's see--the invasion of Iraq in 2003 was over non-existent Weapons of Mass Destruction that harkened back to 1991. 12 years out of date. This meeting goes all the way back to 1987, thus being 18 years out of date. But it's "front page news"?

Why else can it be front page news unless the Bush administration's press is trying to make the case for invading Iran? I'm waiting...

To help them out with justifying further invasions, I can be Tony Blair for their case against Norway. Norway has lots of oil, and a tiny, peacekeeping military. A nice target for the US-as-vulture. Note Germany was working on a massive program for nuclear weapons in the 1940's...in Norway. It's only 60 years ago, so the program could still be going on. And we know for certain there was heavy water in Norway, and we know the Norwegians were planning to blow it up (the German plant, that is, still in the rhetoric of this shaministration, it won't matter).

Plus, weren't they behind those nasty Viking invasions, only a thousand years further back? Damn you, Norwegians, for getting words like "nudge" and "fjord" and "silt" and "iceberg" and "dollop" into our language, messing up our spelling bees. And damn you for always kicking our behinds in the Winter Olympics! And damn you for taking back those crucial 155 members of the Coalition of the Willing. Better watch out, Uncle Sam is coming to get you next!


Thursday, February 24, 2005

Bush Still Wired 

This is really sad. Doesn't it bother anyone else that our President is wired?

The wiring continues on his European "healing" tour:

George W. Bush, who is allegedly on a "charm offensive" across Europe, dropped the charm and was simply offensive at his NATO press conference when he once again relied on a hidden earpiece to feed him canned soundbite answers to reporters' questions.

As NASA scientist Robert Nelson proved last fall, George W. Bush relied on a wireless earpiece in all three of his debates with John Kerry during the 2004 campaign. While bloggers (including Democrats.com, IsBushWired.com, MysteryBulge, Cryptome, and BushBulge.com) have accumulated overwhelming evidence that Bush was wired, the mainstream media has consistently refused to report on any of this evidence.

Investigative reporter David Lindorff has written extensively on Bush's earpiece in Salon.com, MotherJones.com, and Counterpunch.org. On February 3, Lindorff broke new ground with an expose for Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (fair.org) reporting that the NY Times had a solid story ready for publication a week before Election Day - but editors killed the story.

Times science writer William Broad, as well as reporters Andrew Revkin and John Schwartz, got to work on the story, according to Nelson, and produced a story that he says they assured him was scheduled to run the week of October 25. "It got pushed back because of the explosives story," he says, first to Wednesday, and then to Thursday, October 28. That would still have been five days ahead of Election Day...

But on October 28, the article was not in the paper. After learning from the reporters working on the story that their article had been killed the night before by senior editors, Nelson eventually sent his photographic evidence of presidential cheating to Salon magazine, which ran the photos as the magazine’s lead item on October 29. That same day, Nelson received the following email from the Times’ Schwartz:

Congratulations on getting the story into Salon. It’s already all over the Web in every blog I’ve seen this morning. I’m sorry to have been a source of disappointment and frustration to you, but I’m very happy to see your story getting out there. Best wishes, John

After the Times killed its story, the Washington Post quickly followed suit:
Nelson says that the same day he learned that his story had been killed at the Times, October 28, he received a phone call from Washington Post assistant managing editor Bob Woodward, famous for his investigative reports on Watergate. "Woodward said he’d heard the Times had killed the story and asked me if I could send the photos to him," says Nelson.

The JPL scientist did so immediately, via email, noting that he had also been in touch with Salon magazine. He says Woodward then sent his photographs over to a photo analyst at the paper to check them for authenticity, which Nelson says was confirmed.

A day later, realizing time was getting short, Nelson called Woodward back. Recalls Nelson: "He told me, 'Look, I’m going to have to go through a lot of hoops to get this story published. You’re already talking to Salon. Why don’t you work with them?'" (Several emails to Woodward asking him about Nelson's account have gone unanswered.)

At that point Nelson, despairing of getting the pictures in a major publication, went with the online magazine Salon. This reporter subsequently asked Nelson to do a similar photo analysis of digital images of Bush’s back taken from the tapes of the second and third presidential debates. The resulting photos, which also clearly show the cueing device and magnetic loop harness under his jacket on both occasions, were posted, together with Nelson’s images from the first debate, on the news website of Mother Jones magazine (10/30/04).

The key evidence presented by Robert Nelson was his enhanced photos of the bulge in Bush's back, which was attached to a wire that ran along Bush's shoulder blade towards his wired ear. The photos which revealed Bush's bulge were partly an accident - Bush's debate lawyers had insisted on a rule preventing candidates from being photographed from behind. But when this rule leaked to the public, the networks decided to defy the rule. In addition, some key photos were taken while Bush lingered to shake hands on stage.

At today's NATO press conference, there was little chance for another "camera malfunction." Bush walked quickly in and out of the press conference, and all three cable networks relied on a single camera that was placed in front of Bush. Bush was also careful to stand square to the podium, never turning his shoulder to provide a revealing side shot.

But Bush's obvious reliance on his earpiece could be easily detected from the manner in which he delivered his answers.

There are several speaking tics that expose Bush when he is using his earpiece. First, he pauses between sentences for an extra beat, which buys him time to hear the answer he is being fed. Second, when a particular answer is different from his own train of thought, his gaze drops down as he concentrates extra hard on the voice within his ear. Third, he sometimes mumbles and speaks gibberish when his brain and tongue get out of synch. Finally his answers ramble on, going from one stray thought to another, as he "filibusters" to consume all available time.
These "delivery" issues have received less attention from bloggers than the photographic evidence. But they deserve far more attention now, because the White House is obviously determined to prevent cameras from revealing any more bulges.

Thanks to TIVO and video blogging, Bush's rare public appearances can now be shared over the Internet and put under close "linguistic" scrutiny. James Poling was shocked when he caught Bush in the act on 12/20/04:

This is very strange. What the hell is wrong with President Bush, and I don't mean in the "oh my God you lied and invaded a country way" I mean in, I think there's really something either mentally or physically wrong with him.

Watch this video! [Link to C-SPAN clip that no longer exists but archived here.] Go to 16:47 in the press conference and keep your eye on Bush. He is in the middle of speaking to the press and he suddenly drops his head and mumbles something and then immediately continues speaking. It is seriously one of the oddest things I've ever seen.

Can anyone tell what he says? What the hell was that?

Does he have tourettes? Is he talking into his tie? Did his shoe fall off? Seriously, I have never seen anything like this.

I challenge the blogosphere to look for similar telltale video moments - as well as knowledgable linguistic experts - to prove that Bush relies on his earpiece for nearly every public event.

Good gravity, this is pathetic.


Wednesday, February 23, 2005

Victims Unidentified...and Identified 

42% of the victims of 911 at the World Trade Center are not identifiable.

Of those killed, 42 percent remain unidentified due to difficulties in getting DNA samples from the remains. "The remains have become deteriorated. Some have no DNA, and some have only partial DNA," Borakove said.

However, I can identify 285 million victims of the Pentagon 911 "attack". The denizens of the US:

The passenger list of Flight 77 included a surprisingly large number of aerospace professionals and government officials. By over-flying the Pentagon (rather than striking it), it may have been possible to save the lives of these individuals, and perhaps to give them new roles and new identities. This could also have been accomplished by keeping those people off the plane in the first place -- but allowing them to board Flight 77 in accordance with the Official Story would have provided a note of realism. As Gerard Holmgren has noted, Flight 77 did not appear in a government database of scheduled flights, and we are not aware whether or not there is any civilian eyewitness testimony of the flight's boarding and departure.

If there is *anyone* out there who still clings to the hapless notion that the Pentagon was hit by a 757, please Google "Pentagon Attack" and decide for yourself.

Or try this site: http://www.bcrevolution.ca/911_photos_prove_hoax.htm


The difference between Bush and Clinton 

Now the patently obvious--the fact that Bush has partaken of illegal drugs--has been admitted:

Bush also criticizes then-Vice President Al Gore for admitting marijuana use and explains why he would not do the same. "I wouldn't answer the marijuana questions," he said, according to the Times. "You know why? Because I don't want some little kid doing what I tried."

Nice of these tapes, obviously taken before the first of two Bush "victories" in the elections, to not be released until the man is a lame duck. A dangerous, wimpy cowboy macho smelly sock wrapped in a used cigar and stored under a chicken coop lame duck, that is (this sentence in memory of Hunter S. Thompson). But Bush proves, like Rush Slimebaugh (Mr. high-and-mighty about drugs until he was caught chain-gulping prescription pain killers--despite the fact his listeners were the ones who were in the most pain...I digress) and the rest of their ilk, that he is a two-faced, lying hypocrite. Glad he won the election on "morals".

Remember when Clinton admitted he'd sampled marijuana, and with the normal Clinton doublespeak said he'd "never inhaled"? Well, now we've found the difference between the two men. Bush has never exhaled.


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?