Utilizing a little known rule of the U.S. House to bring Impeachment charges.

The Illinois General Assembly is about to rock the nation.
Members of state legislatures are normally not considered as having the ability to decide issues with a massive impact to the nation as a whole. Representative Karen A. Yarbrough of Illinois’ 7th District is about to shatter that perception forever.
Representative Yarbrough stumbled on a little known and never utlitized rule of the US House of Representatives,
Section 603 of Jefferson’s Manual of the Rules of the United States House of Representatives,
which allows federal impeachment proceedings to be initiated by joint resolution of a state legislature.
From there, Illinois House Joint Resolution 125 (hereafter to be referred to as HJR0125) was born.
Detailing five specific charges against President Bush including one that is specified to be a felony,
the complete text of HJR0125 is copied below.
One of the interesting points is that one of the items,
the one specified as a felony, that the NSA was directed by the President to spy on American citizens without warrant, is not in dispute.
That fact should prove an interesting dilemma for a Republican controlled US House
that clearly is not only loathe to initiate impeachment proceedings,
but does not even want to thoroughly investigate any of the five items brought up by the Illinois Assembly as high crimes and/or misdemeanors. Should HJR0125 be passed by the Illinois General Assembly,
the US House will be forced by House Rules to take up the issue of impeachment as a privileged bill,
meaning it will take precedence over other House business.
The Illinois General Assembly joins a growing chorus of voices calling for censure or impeachment of President Bush
including Democratic state committees in Vermont, Wisconsin, New Mexico, Nevada and North Carolina
as well as the residents themselves of seven towns in Vermont, seventy Vermont state legislators and Congressman John Conyers.
The call for impeachment is starting to grow well beyond what could be considered a fringe movement.
An ABC News/Washington Post Poll Conducted April 6-9 showed that 33% of Americans currently support Impeaching President Bush,
coincidentally, only a similar amount supported impeaching Nixon at the start of the Watergate investigation.
If and when Illinois HJR0125 hits the capitol and the individual charges are publicly investigated, that number is likely to grow rapidly.
Combined with the very real likelihood that Rove is about to be indicted in the LeakGate investigation,
and Bush is in real trouble beyond his plummeting poll numbers.
His cronies in the Republican dominated congress will probably save him from the embarassment of an impeachment conviction, for now, but his Presidency will be all but finished.

——————————————

HJ0125 LRB094 20306 RLC 58347 r

1 HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION

2 WHEREAS, Section 603 of Jefferson’s Manual of the Rules of
3 the United States House of Representatives allows federal
4 impeachment proceedings to be initiated by joint resolution of
5 a state legislature; and

6 WHEREAS, President Bush has publicly admitted to ordering
7 the National Security Agency to violate provisions of the 1978
8 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, a felony, specifically
9 authorizing the Agency to spy on American citizens without
10 warrant; and

11 WHEREAS, Evidence suggests that President Bush authorized
12 violation of the Torture Convention of the Geneva Conventions,
13 a treaty regarded a supreme law by the United States
14 Constitution; and

15 WHEREAS, The Bush Administration has held American
16 citizens and citizens of other nations as prisoners of war
17 without charge or trial; and

18 WHEREAS, Evidence suggests that the Bush Administration
19 has manipulated intelligence for the purpose of initiating a
20 war against the sovereign nation of Iraq, resulting in the
21 deaths of large numbers of Iraqi civilians and causing the
22 United States to incur loss of life, diminished security and
23 billions of dollars in unnecessary expenses; and

24 WHEREAS, The Bush Administration leaked classified
25 national secrets to further a political agenda, exposing an
26 unknown number of covert U. S. intelligence agents to potential
27 harm and retribution while simultaneously refusing to
28 investigate the matter; and

29 WHEREAS, The Republican-controlled Congress has declined

1 to fully investigate these charges to date; therefore, be it

2 RESOLVED, BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE
3 NINETY-FOURTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, THE
4 SENATE CONCURRING HEREIN, that the General Assembly of the
5 State of Illinois has good cause to submit charges to the U. S.
6 House of Representatives under Section 603 that the President
7 of the United States has willfully violated his Oath of Office
8 to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United
9 States; and be it further

10 RESOLVED, That George W. Bush, if found guilty of the
11 charges contained herein, should be removed from office and
12 disqualified to hold any other office in the United States.

Developing News; California Becomes Second State to Introduce Bush Impeachment

Developing: Vermont lawmakers to call for Bush impeachment

Take action — click here to contact your local newspaper or congress people:
Support the Impeachment of President Bush

courtesy of dcmann

It’s astonishing how many people believe that Iraq is in a civil war.

Isn’t clear by now that all the excuses leading up to the war were entirely false; that of the claims of WMD and connections to 9-11 were completely baseless?

And wasn’t the “alleged” terrorist mastermind, Abu Musab al Zarqawi, that shabby invention of Pentagon-propagandists and their surrogates in the state-run media, exposed as a fraud just last week in a Washington Post article:

“The U.S. military is conducting a propaganda campaign to magnify the role of the leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq, according to internal military documents and officers familiar with the program. The effort has raised his profile in a way that some military intelligence officials believe may have overstated his importance and helped the Bush administration tie the war to the organization responsible for the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.” (Wa Post)

More lies. More propaganda.

So why are the American people so eager to accept the Pentagon spin about civil war? Are we to believe that the media has suddenly “seen the light” and decided to report events as objectively as possible?

Nonsense.

The present strategy was produced by the right-wing think tank, Rand Corp. and was designed to exploit the ideological and religious differences of the Iraqi people, even though Iraq has no history of sectarian violence.

The very same plan was articulated by Leslie Gelb, president emeritus of the powerful Council on Foreign Relations who wrote in a New York Times article (“The Three-State Solution,” 25 November 2003) that the United States commitment to a united Iraq was “fundamentally flawed”.

He added ominously:

“For decades, the United States has worshiped at the altar of a unified yet unnatural Iraqi state. Allowing all three communities within that false state to emerge at least as self-governing regions would be both difficult and dangerous. Washington would have to be very hard-headed, and hard-hearted, to engineer this breakup. But such a course is manageable, even necessary, because it would allow us to find Iraq’s future in its denied but natural past.”

The Bush administration has never veered from its plan to divide Iraq, that explains why the recalcitrant Rumsfeld has refused to put more “boots on the ground” to establish security. Security is not the plan; dissolution of the Iraqi state is.

The civil war storyline is intended to divert attention from the bloody subjugation of the Iraqi people by a foreign military. This is the real story of the Iraqi conflict. The current malaise in Iraq is reducible to three bullet-points; occupation, occupation, and occupation. Any departure from this essential narrative is simply false.

American Intelligence services are involved in every aspect of the current hostilities. Author Max Fuller (“Crying Wolf: Media disinformation and Deaths squads in Occupied Iraq”) has documented how CIA operatives have not only trained the Iraqi death squads operating in the Interior ministry, but created a high-tech facility with data banks of the names of potential targets for future attacks.

Does that sound like civil war or a massive counterinsurgency strategy designed to rip the country apart?

So far, there have been three separate incidents where occupation forces have been either caught or connected to bombings in Iraq. This suggests that America is conducting a clandestine “dirty war” similar to campaigns they executed in El Salvador and Nicaragua under the very same leadership.

The first was the famous incident in Basra where two British paramilitaries were caught disguised as Arabs with a truck-full of explosives in their vehicle. Panicky British forces destroyed the Basra jail to release the two captured SAS soldiers clearly afraid that their involvement in setting off bombs would be exposed.

Another report that appeared in Reuters “American arrested with weapons in Iraq” confirmed that an American “security contractor working for a private company, possessed explosives which were found in his car.” He was arrested by Iraqi security guards.

The bombing of the Golden-domed mosque also suggests links to occupation forces. The AFP reported that the bombing “was the work of specialists” and the “placing of explosives must have taken at least 12 hours”. The report continues:

“Construction Minister Jassem Mohammed Jaafar said, “Holes were dug into the mausoleum’s four main pillars and packed with explosives. Then charges were connected together and linked to another charge placed just under the dome. The wires were then linked to a detonator which was triggered at a distance.”

Clearly the bombing was not carried out by rogue elements in the disparate Iraqi resistance but highly trained saboteurs executing a precision demolition to incite sectarian violence. The blast bears all the hallmarks of a covert Intelligence agency operation. Eyewitness accounts verify that American troops and Iraqi National Guard were active in the area throughout the night and that their cars could be heard running “the whole night until next morning”. People living around the mosque were told “to stay in your shop and don’t leave the area”.

At 6:30 AM the American troops left, just 10 minutes before the bombs went off.

Since the bombing, the media has faithfully reiterated the same narrative from every soapbox; that the destruction of the mosque was the “catalyzing event” which put Iraq on the path to civil war.

No independent investigation of the bombing has ever been conducted by occupation forces. That hasn’t stopped the media from promoting their Pentagon-friendly view of the incident.

The media spin on the bombing is just as suspect as earlier fabrications about WMD or al Zarqawi. In fact, the one journalist from Al Arybiya who was interviewing people who lived around the mosque was conveniently killed by occupation troops.

Let’s summarize: The rationale leading up to the war was a lie. The justification for the ongoing occupation as a fight against terrorism (al Zarqawi) was a lie. The fairy tale about an Iraqi civil war is a lie. And, presumably, all the future stories diverting attention from America’s bloody occupation will be lies.

In an article by Dirk Adriaensens “The Assassination of Iraqi Academics” (Brussels Tribune) the author recounts the macabre details of the present campaign to liquidate academics, intellectuals, scientists and other members of the Iraqi middle class — “a class that has largely resisted the US occupation of Iraq and refused to be co-opted by the so-called “political process” or Iraq’s US-installed puppet government.”

Why would Sunnis or Shiites choose to target people who represent the intellectual foundation of Iraqi society?

There is a much more sinister plan afoot; a plan to destroy the very platforms of Iraqi identity, a plan to obliterate the monuments, the mosques, the museums; a plan to remove any trace of Iraqi nationalism from the collective memory; a plan to crush any potential threat to the new order.

This is cultural genocide.

As Adriaensens says, “What we are witnessing is the result of a carefully planned US campaign to liquidate every Iraqi who opposes the occupation of his country, the so-called “Salvador option”. In fact, since 1945 the U.S. developed counterinsurgency policies based on the model of Nazi suppression of partisan insurgents that emphasized placing the civilian population under strict control and using terror to make the population afraid to support or collaborate with insurgents

The waves of violence that have subsumed Iraq radiate directly from the White House. Don’t blame the Iraqis. The world’s oldest civilization is being systematically reduced to rubble to feed the insatiable greed of Washington warlords and corporate kingpins.

Iraq is America’s slaughterhouse; the Iraqi people have no part in this crime.

Don’t call it civil war.

Pentagon Plans to Infiltrate Subversive Sites and Blogs

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was warmly greeted at the recent meeting of the Council on Foreign Relations. The CFR is the hand-picked assemblage of western elites from big-energy, corporate media, high-finance and the weapons industry. These are the 4,000 or so members of the American ruling class who determine the shape of policy and ensure that the management of the global economic system remains in the hands of U.S. bluebloods.

As the Pentagon’s chief-coordinator, Rumsfeld enjoys a prominent place among American mandarins. He is the caretaker of their most prized possession; the high-tech, taxpayer-funded, laser-guided war machine. The US Military is the crown-jewel of the American empire; a fully-operational security apparatus for the protection of pilfered resources and the ongoing subjugation of the developing world.

Rumsfeld’s speech alerted his audience to the threats facing America in the new century.

He opined: “We meet today in the 6th year in what promises to be a long struggle against an enemy that in many ways is unlike any our country has ever faced. And, in this war, some of the most critical battles may not be in the mountains in Afghanistan or in the streets of Iraq, but in newsrooms—in places like New York, London, Cairo, and elsewhere.”

“New York”?

“Our enemies have skillfully adapted to fighting wars in today’s media age, but for the most part our country has not”.

Huh? Does Rummy mean those grainy, poorly-produced videos of Bin Laden and co.?

“Consider that the violent extremists have established ‘media relations committees’—and have proven to be highly-successful at manipulating opinion-elites. They plan to design their headline-grabbing attacks using every means of communications to intimidate and break the collective will of free people”.

What gibberish.

It’s foolish to mention “intimidating and breaking the collective will of free people” without entering Abu Ghraib, Guantanomo and Falluja into the discussion. Rumsfeld is just griping about the disgrace he’s heaped on America’s reputation by his refusal to conform to even minimal standards of decency. Instead, he insists that America’s declining stature in the world is the result of a hostile media and “skillful enemies”; in other words, anyone with a computer keyboard and a rudimentary sense of moral judgment.

(Our enemies) “know that communications transcend borders…and that a single news story , handled skillfully, can be as damaging to our cause and as helpful to theirs, as any other method of military attack”.

If the Pentagon is really so worried about “bad press coverage” why not close down the torture-chambers and withdrawal from Iraq? Instead, Rumsfeld is making the case for a preemptive-assault on free speech.

“The growing number of media outlets in many parts of the world….too often serve to inflame and distort, rather than explain and inform. And while Al Qaida and extremist movements have utilized this forum for many years, and have successfully poisoned the Muslim public’s view of the West, we have barely even begun to compete in reaching their audiences.”

“Inflame and distort”?

What distortion? Do cameras distort the photos of abused prisoners, desperate people, or decimated cities?

Rumsfeld’s analysis borders on the delusional. Al Qaida doesn’t have a well-oiled propaganda mechanism that provides a steady stream of fabrications to whip the public into a frenzy. That’s the American media’s assignment. And, they haven’t “poisoned Muslim public opinion” against us. That has been entirely the doing of the Pentagon warlords and their White House compatriots.

“The standard US government public affairs operation was designed primarily …to be reactive rather than proactive…Government, however, is beginning to adapt”

“Proactive news”? In other words, propaganda.

Rumsfeld confirms his dedication to propaganda by defending the bogus stories that were printed in Iraqi newspapers by Pentagon contractors. (We) “sought non-traditional means to provide accurate information to the Iraqi people in the face of an aggressive campaign of disinformation….This has been deemed inappropriate—for examples the allegations of ‘buying news’”.

A brazen defense of intentionally planted lies; how low can we sink?

This has had a “chilling effect for those who are asked to serve in the military public affairs field.”

Is it really that difficult to print the truth?

Rumsfeld boasts of the vast changes in “communications planning” taking place at the Pentagon.

A “public affairs” strategy is at the heart of the new paradigm, replete with “rapid response” teams to address the nagging issues of bombed-out wedding parties, starving prisoners, and devastated cities. No problem is so great that it can’t be papered-over by a public relations team trained in the black-art of deception, obfuscation, and slight-of-hand. Trickery now tops the list of military priorities.

“US Central Command has launched an online communications effort that includes electronic news updates and a links campaign that has resulted in several hundred blogs receiving and publishing CENTCOM content.”

The military plans to develop the “institutional capability” to respond to critical news coverage within the same news cycle and to develop a comprehensive scheme for infiltrating the internet.

The Pentagon’s strategy for taking over the internet and controlling the free flow of information has already been chronicled in a recently declassified report, “The Information Operations Roadmap”; is a window into the minds of those who see free speech as dangerous as an “enemy weapons-system”.

The Pentagon is aiming for “full spectrum dominance” of the Internet. Their objective is to manipulate public perceptions, quash competing points of view, and perpetuate a narrative of American generosity and good-will.

Rumsfeld’s comments are intended to awaken his constituents to the massive information war that is being waged to transform the Internet into the progeny of the MSM; a reliable partner for the dissemination of establishment-friendly news.

The Associated Press reported recently that the US government conducted a massive simulated attack on the Internet called “Cyber-Storm”. The wargame was designed, among other things, to “respond to misinformation campaigns and activist calls by internet bloggers, online diarists whose ‘Web logs” include political rantings and musings about current events”.

Before Bush took office, “political rantings and musings about current events” were protected under the 1st amendment.

No more.

The War Department is planning to insert itself into every area of the Internet from blogs to chat rooms, from leftist web sites to editorial commentary. Their rapid response team will be on hair-trigger alert to dispute any tidbit of information that challenges the official storyline.

We can expect to encounter, as the BBC notes, “psychological operations (that) try to manipulate the thoughts and the beliefs of the enemy (as well as) computer network specialists who seek to destroy enemy networks.”

The enemy, of course, is anyone who refuses to accept their servile role in the new world order or who disrupts the smooth-operation of the Bush police-state.

The resolve to foreclose on free speech has never been greater.

As for Rumsfeld’s devotees at the CFR, the problem of savaging civil liberties is never seriously raised. After all, these are the primary beneficiaries of Washington’s global resource-war; should it matter that other people’s freedom is sacrificed to perpetuate the fundamental institutions of class and privilege?

Rumsfeld is right. The only way to prevail on the information-battlefield is to “take no prisoners”; police the Internet, uproot the troublemakers and activists who provide the truth, and “catapult the propaganda” (Bush) from every bullhorn and web site across the virtual-universe. Free speech is a luxury we cannot afford if it threatens to undermine the basic platforms of western white rule.

As Rumsfeld said, “We are fighting a battle where the survival of our free way of life is at stake.”

Indeed, it is.

Republished fron BBC

Australian troops are arriving in the Solomon Islands to help restore peace after rioting and looting in the capital, Honiara.

Hundreds of demonstrators marched on the government building on Wednesday, demanding the Prime Minister-elect, Snyder Rini, stand down.

Parts of Honiara are in ruins following rioting on Tuesday, and demonstrators have threatened more destruction.

Mr Rini denies claims he is corrupt and favours Chinese businessmen.

Much of Honiara’s Chinatown area was razed overnight and some families were forced to jump from burning buildings. Police have imposed a dusk-to-dawn curfew on the city.

Mr Rini emerged from a meeting with advisers on Wednesday to appeal to Honiara residents to “remain calm”, reported AFP news agency.

In an earlier statement he invited protesters to engage in dialogue with him, but did not respond to the demands that he should resign, said the agency. His swearing-in, originally set for Wednesday, has been postponed.

Troops arrive

Some 180 Australian soldiers and police have begun arriving in the country to try to impose order after a written request from the Solomons government. A smaller contingent of additional New Zealand peacekeepers are set to arrive on Thursday.

But the BBC’s Phil Mercer says there are concerns that the presence of more foreign troops could inflame the situation in the troubled city.

About 280 Australian police were already in the country as part of a regional force sent to restore peace in 2003, after violence stirred up by local warlords left hundreds dead and 20,000 displaced.

Wednesday’s rioting came after newly-elected MPs met in secret to elect a new prime minister.

‘Chinese connections’

Mr Rini, 56, beat off two main rivals in Tuesday’s secret ballot for the leadership - former Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare and Job Dudley Tausinga, leader of the new Rural Advancement Party.

Mr Rini did not refer to demands that he stand down

He is accused of being too closely linked to former Prime Minister Allan Kemakeza’s administration, which was tainted by corruption allegations.

Demonstrators also claim that the new government is heavily influenced by the Taiwan government and local Chinese businessmen.

On Wednesday a political opponent of Mr Rini alleged MPs had been paid to vote for him, the Solomon Star newspaper reported.

“Some of this rioting was sparked by allegations made by Snyder Rini’s political opponents that he was in receipt of Chinese, meaning I think largely Taiwanese, money,” Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer reportedly told Australian television.

But Mr Rini denied there had been any “influence by outsiders”, in a report on the Solomon Star website.

“Some Solomon Islanders have been resentful of the Chinese,” said government spokesman Johnson Honimae.

“[The Chinese] were taking up all the businesses in town and all the staff and prices were increasing unreasonably. It’s something that people have been holding within them,” he said.

But Solomons police chief Shane Castles said protesters’ complaints about the election had quickly descended into “opportunistic robbery and looting”, according to AP news agency.

‘Surprise’ eruption

AP reported a government official as saying Mr Rini was being held in a secret location.

The BBC’s Phil Mercer says the lawlessness in Honiara has taken the authorities by surprise.

The security situation across the Solomons archipelago had improved since the Australian-led mission arrived in 2003, after years of tribal violence had resulted in the breakdown of law and order.

The conflict - between indigenous residents of the main island of Guadalcanal and settlers from the island of Malaita - was fought over land rights and jobs.

But what the foreign forces have been unable to soothe are the political tensions that have for many years divided this troubled South Pacific nation, our correspondent says.

citx say- do YOU recognize[sic] that you are AS disenfranchised..in truth..as are these islanders..or the ‘undocumented’ in this country..or those in Germany or France
FORGIVE ME…if you happen to have a net worth of $500 million..then MAYBE you AREN’T..maybe.
but otherwize[sic] this buds for YOU.

kill the messengers

“lets all celebrate..an have a real GOOD time!”

Ehud Olmert declared himself the new Israeli Prime Minister in the early morning hours of Wednesday, adding that he would go forward with a plan for full apartheid with the Palestinians, with the Israeli Annexation Wall separating the two peoples along a border unilaterally declared by Israel.

Olmert, who has been the acting Israeli prime minister since Ariel Sharon suffered a stroke in January, earlier outlined the plan as part of his election campaign, saying, “We will take the Jordan Valley, the Ma’ale Adumim bloc, and of course Ariel will always remain a part of Israel” — referring to the names of large Israeli settlements built illegally (according to international law) on occupied Palestinian land over the last 40 years. Israel captured the West Bank and Jerusalem, home to about 2.5 million Palestinians, in the 1967 Mideast War, and has occupied it, and transferred 450,000 Israeli citizens to live there (in the West Bank and East Jerusalem), in the 40 years since.

The choice was painful, Olmert said, but if Israel did not act quickly and divide themselves completely from the Palestinians, the Arab population would soon outnumber the Jewish population in Israel. “It would lead to the loss of Israel as a Jewish state,” he said.

Tuesday’s vote marked the first time the leading candidate has laid out a concrete vision for the future of the West Bank. After last summer’s so-called “disengagement” from the Gaza Strip, in which 6,000 Israeli settlers were paid to leave their homes built illegally on occupied Palestinian land, much of the Israeli military force that had been stationed in the Gaza Strip moved to the West Bank, where 250,000 Israeli settlers live illegally on occupied Palestinian land. The number of settlers in the West Bank increased by 8,000 last year, so that, despite the ‘disengagement’ of Israeli settlers from the Gaza Strip, the net number of settlers living on Palestinian land actually increased last year, according to the Israeli human rights group B’tselem.

Tuesday’s Israeli election, which had record low turnouts, particularly among Arab-Israelis, who expressed an overwhelming sentiment that there was no one for them to vote for among the candidates presented, became almost a referendum for Olmert’s platform of apartheid after he presented his plan so openly last month.

“This is perhaps the most important election in all of Israel’s life,” said Mordechai Aviv, 76, of Jerusalem. “We are going to separate between us and the Arabs.

With most of the votes counted, Olmert’s Kadima Party appears set to win, but with a much smaller lead than expected. Olmert has said he would only invite parties that back his plan to join his government, but he might be forced to seek other allies if Kadima wins fewer seats than expected. Labor, which favors territorial concessions, was expected to win about 20 seats, and Likud, which favors a full takeover of the Palestinian land and expulsion of the Palestinian residents, was polling at 14.

Under Olmert’s plan, Israel’s partially completed Annexation Wall, which annexes 20% of the West Bank, including all of East Jerusalem, for Israel, will become the new border within four years. Israeli settlers would be moved from some settlements into other settlements on the ‘Israeli side’ of the Wall, and the Palestinian areas would be divided into enclaves completely controlled by Israeli military forces.

“We will determine the line of the security fence, and we will make sure that no Jewish settlements will be left on the other side of the fence. Drawing the final borders is our obligation as leaders and as a society,” Olmert wrote Tuesday in an op-ed piece published in the Yediot Ahronot daily.

China, Russia, and a number of other countries have criticized Israel for acting unilaterally to set their border and continuing settlement expansion, even while Hamas has held to its end of a ceasefire declared last February. During the ‘ceasefire’ period, Hamas claimed responsibility for killing one Israeli, while Israeli forces have killed over 220 Palestinians, including 44 children.

Since the state of Israel was created in 1947, the state has never declared its borders, and has continued to expand throughout Palestinian land, expelling the Palestinian residents and allowing Israeli settlers to live there. As a result of the 1948 and subsequent expulsions, Palestinians are now the largest refugee population in the world.

another result…Israel is doomed to suffer the same fate as South Africa and the USSR and………wait for it….

NAZI germany.

hey dont feel bad ‘chosen ones’ the good ‘ole US of A aint far behind ya!..i will see you in HELL Ariel.

Ontario, California

Eighth grader Anthony Soltero shot himself through the head on Thursday, March 30, after the assistant principal at De Anza Middle School told him that he was going to prison for three years because of his involvement as an organizer of the April 28 school walk-outs to protest the anti-immigrant legislation in Washington. The vice principal also forbade Anthony from attending graduation activities and threatened to fine his mother for Anthony’s truancy and participation in the student protests.

“Anthony was learning about the importance of civic duties and rights in his eighth grade class. Ironically, he died because the vice principal at his school threatened him for speaking out and exercising those rights,” Ms. Corales said today. “I want to speak out to other parents, whose children are attending the continuing protests this week. We have to let the schools know that they can’t punish our children for exercising their rights.”

Anthony’s death is likely the first fatality arising from the protests against the immigration legislation being considered in Washington, D.C. Anthony, who was a very good student at De Anza Middle School in the Ontario-Montclair School District, believed in justice and was passionate about the immigration issue. He is survived by his mother, Louise Corales, his father, a younger sister, and a baby brother.

Anthony’s funeral and burial are scheduled for Monday, April 10, 2006, at 9:30 a.m., STRICKLAND & SNIVERY, 1953 Long Beach Boulevard, Long Beach, CA 90806.

citx say- may the FULL crushing force of the Wheel of Karma come quickly down upon the administrators responsible.
Keepers of the Wheel can contact Kathy Kinley, principal at De Anza Middle School, on (909) 986-8577

by Jorge Hirsch

H istory repeats itself, but always with new twists. We are back to the good old days when a Declaration of War preceded the start of a war. Such declaration occurred on March 16th, 2006.
Reversing the old order, we are now in the “Sitzkrieg”, to be followed shortly by an aerial “Blitzkrieg” in the coming days.

In the old days, Congress declared war, and directed the Executive to take action. In the new millenium, the Executive declared war last March 16th, then Congress will pass H.R. 282, “To hold the current regime in Iran accountable for its threatening behavior and to support a transition to democracy in Iran.” This bill and previous ones like it are in direct violation of the legally binding Algiers Accords[pdf] signed by the United States and Iran on January 19, 1981, that states “The United States pledges that it is and from now on will be the policy of the United States not to intervene, directly or indirectly, politically or militarily, in Iran’s internal affairs”; however, this is clearly of no interest to the 353 policymakers sponsoring the bill.

The US promised Russia and China that
the UN Security Council statement just approved will not be a trigger for
military action after 30 days; true to its promise, the US will attack before
the 30-day deadline imposed by the UNSC for Iran to stop its nuclear enrichment
activity, i.e. before the end of April. The “justification” is likely to be
an alleged threat of
imminent biological attack with Iran’s involvement.

The Declaration of War against Iran

I n the aftermath of Pearl Harbor, the
Congressional Declaration of December 8, 1941 stated: ” Whereas the Imperial
Government of Japan has committed unprovoked acts of war against the Government
and the people of the United States of America: Therefore be it Resolved by
the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress
assembled, That the state of war between the United States and the Imperial
Government of Japan which has thus been thrust upon the United States is hereby
formally declared; and the president is hereby authorized and directed to employ
the entire naval and military forces of the United States and the resources
of the Government to carry on war against the Imperial Government of Japan.”

Similarly, the formal war declaration against Iran, the
National Security Strategy of March 16, 2006, stated:

• “We may face no greater challenge from a single country than from Iran.”
• “The Iranian regime sponsors terrorism; threatens Israel; seeks to thwart
  Middle East peace; disrupts democracy in Iraq; and denies the aspirations
  of its people for freedom.”
• “[T]he first duty of the United States Government remains what it always
  has been: to protect the American people and American interests. It is an
  enduring American principle that this duty obligates the government to anticipate
  and counter threats, using all elements of national power, before the threats
  can do grave damage.”
• “The greater the threat, the greater is the risk of inaction – and the
  more compelling the case for taking anticipatory action to defend ourselves,
  even if uncertainty remains as to the time and place of the enemy’s attack.
  There are few greater threats than a terrorist attack with WMD.”
• “To forestall or prevent such hostile acts by our adversaries, the United
  States will, if necessary, act preemptively.”
• “When the consequences of an attack with WMD are potentially so devastating,
  we cannot afford to stand idly by as grave dangers materialize.”
• “[T]here will always be some uncertainty about the status of hidden programs.”
• “Advances in biotechnology provide greater opportunities for state and
  non-state actors to obtain dangerous pathogens and equipment.”
• “Biological weapons also pose a grave WMD threat because of the risks of
  contagion that would spread disease across large populations and around the
  globe.”
• “Countering the spread of biological weapons …. will also enhance our
  Nation’s ability to respond to pandemic public health threats, such as avian
  influenza.”

This has to be combined with the 2005 U.S. State Department “FINDING.
The United States judges that, based on all available information, Iran has
an offensive biological weapons program in violation of the BWC.”

In addition, the March 16 declaration makes it clear that the US
will use nuclear weapons in the war against Iran:

• .”..using all elements of national power…”
• “Safe, credible, and reliable nuclear forces continue to play a critical
  role. We are strengthening deterrence by developing a New Triad composed of
  offensive strike systems (both nuclear and improved conventional capabilities).”

and this is further reinforced by the just
released
“National Military Strategy to Combat Weapons of Mass Destruction”[pdf]
that states “Offensive operations may include kinetic (both conventional and
nuclear) and/or non-kinetic options (e.g. information operations) to deter or
defeat a WMD threat or subsequent use of WMD.”

There is of course also the
claim that Iran is a threat because it intends to develop nuclear weapons.
The sole purpose of that claim, which
flies in the face of all available evidence, is to
generate a diplomatic stalemate at the UN that will allow Bush to state
that
other nations share the US concern but not the resolve to act. However the
actual trigger for the bombing to begin will not be the
long-term and
by now discredited nuclear threat, rather it is likely to be the
threat of an imminent biological attack.

Casus Belli

There is no casus belli against Iran based on
its nuclear program. The
IAEA has found no evidence that in the 20 years of its development there
has been any diversion of nuclear material to military applications. The Bush
administration now
officially acknowledges that the issue with Iran arises from a
“loophole” in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, that allows non-nuclear
countries to pursue uranium enrichment.
However it is not a loophole, the right to a full civilian nuclear program is
an integral part of the compromise, that made non-nuclear countries agree
to it. For the US to call it a loophole means to abrogate the treaty unilaterally
and propose a different treaty that non-nuclear countries will have no motivation
to agree to.

The Bush administration declares that a civilian nuclear program that gives
Iran
“knowledge” or
“capability” to build a nuclear weapon is unacceptable. It could apply exactly
the same logic to biotechnology.
The State Department says that “Iran is expanding its biotechnology and
biomedical industries by building large, state-of-the-art research and pharmaceutical
production facilities. These industries could easily hide pilot to industrial-scale
production capabilities for a potential BW program, and could mask procurement
of BW-related process equipment.” Why isn’t the US demanding that Iran stops
its biotechnology research and development, and that
it transfers all biotech related activities to Russia?

The key lies in
Executive Order 13292, which made information on “weapons of mass destruction”
and on “defense against transnational terrorism” classified. If concrete details
about Iran’s
alleged biological weapons programs were made public, they would be subject
to public scrutiny and they would be discredited, as the
allegations on Iran’s “nuclear weapons program” have been. The US is likely
to have “assembled” classified information on Iran’s biological weapons programs
and shared it with selected individuals, including members of Congress, under
the constraint that classified information cannot be made public. For example,
at the
June 25, 2004 House subcommittee “MEMBERS ONLY CLASSIFIED BRIEFING on Iran,
Middle East Proliferation and Terrorist Capabilities.” The unclassified
portion of that
briefing states “It is time for Iran to declare its biological weapons
program and make arrangements for its dismantlement.”

There is likely to be a
team of “experts” lined up by the administration that will support its
claims that Iran had a biological weapons program representing an imminent
threat. There is always room in science for differing opinions, and if an open
scientific debate is not possible because information is classified, any outlandish
claim can find some supporters in the scientific community. The
most likely biological threat to be invoked, because it has a
natural time element associated with it, is the
threat of a bird flu pandemic caused by a
deliberately mutated H5N1 virus carried
by migrating wild
birds.

The
Biological Threat

C onsider for example
Dr. Ward Casscells, a renowned cardiologist that has of late
become an “expert” in bioterrorism. Even more recently, Dr. Casscells
joined the Army as a colonel . According to the US Defense Department,
“his years of research on now-spreading avian flu are now deemed cutting edge.”
However, I know of no independent credible scientific body that makes the same
assessment: Dr. Casscells has written a total of four papers on the effect of
influenza on cardiac disease which have been cited by no other scientists. His
paper “Influenza as a bioweapon” has a grand total of 5 citations, meaning a
mere 5 other papers refer to it; “cutting edge” scientific papers have hundreds
or thousands of citations. His only other paper on the subject, “Influenza as
a bioterror threat: the need for global vaccination” has zero citations.

Nonetheless,
Dr. Casscells’ outstanding credentials as a scientist will be invoked by
the administration if he vouches for the credibility of “intelligence” indicating
that a dangerous mutated bird flu virus has been developed in an Iranian underground
bioweapons laboratory. Dr. Casscells has been surveilling the Middle East to

“scope out the possibility for a widespread outbreak” of bird flu. Because
he has been advocating the view that
“Bird flu is poised to be an explosive problem” and has
predicted the use of influenza as a bioweapon, he is likely to be inclined
to believe such claims. Similarly his scientific colleagues at the
“Defense of Houston” committee, that work on anticipating bioterrorism threats
and
are highly lauded by the administration and very well
funded by Army grants.

The
Bush administration has spent
vast sums of money in combating bioterrorism threats, reportedly
over $7 billion per year, without any evidence or precedent for bioterrorism
attacks. Nevertheless
there will always be plenty of scientists that will flock to
where the grant money is and devote efforts to validate conclusions that
are valued by the organizations giving the grants,
and news media duly publicize the
hyped threat of bioterrorism. Still, last year over
700 scientists including 2 Nobel laureates signed a petition objecting to
the diversion of funds from projects of high public-health importance to biodefense,
calling it a “misdirection” of priorities. Dr. Richard H. Ebright, a renowned
molecular biologist,
states that “A majority of the nation’s top microbiologists – the very group
that the Bush administration is counting on to carry out its biodefense research
agenda – dispute the premises and implementation of the biodefense spending.”

On the supposed threat of bird flu, while it is continuously being hyped by
the administration
[1],
[2],
[3],
[4],
[5], expert opinion is that it is not a serious threat
[1],
[2],
[3],
[4],
[5],
[6]
and is politically motivated. The blaming of bird flu spread on wild birds
is also highly questionable [1],
[2].

On March 15th, right before the disclosure of the new National Security Strategy,
I suggested
the bird flu casus belli against Iran, that would “necessitate” bombing
of Iranian facilities before the bird migration season begins in the
Spring. Several elements emphasized in the March 16 NSS appear to support that
scenario, as
discussed above. In a
March 20 press conference concerning federal preparedness for avian flu,
Secretary Michael Leavitt (who also
warned a few weeks ago to store tuna and milk under the bed to prepare for bird
flu ) stated “Think of the world if you will as a vast forest that is susceptible
to fire. A spark if allowed to burn will emerge as an uncontainable fire. That’s
a pandemic. If we are there when the spark happens, it can be squelched. But
if allowed to burn for a time it begins to spread uncontrollably.” An aerial
attack on Iranian installations may be touted as the “squelching” of the bird
flu pandemic spark.

Does Bush need congressional authorization to bomb Iran?

The answer is contained in the
Statement by the president of October 16, 2002, in signing into law the
congressional authorization to use force against Iraq. It states

“…I sought an additional resolution of support from the Congress to
use force against Iraq, should force become necessary. While I appreciate receiving
that support, my request for it did not, and my signing this resolution does
not, constitute any change in the long-standing positions of the executive branch
on either the president’s constitutional authority to use force to deter, prevent,
or respond to aggression or other threats to U.S. interests or on the constitutionality
of the War Powers Resolution.”

In other words: “I appreciate Congress’ authorization but didn’t need it and
will not need it next time with Iran.”

The
War Powers Resolution encourages the president to consult with Congress
“in every possible instance”,
yet allows the president to introduce Armed Forces into hostilities without
Congressional authorization; it simply compels him to terminate hostilities
within 60 to 90 days unless Congress authorizes an extension. Plenty time enough.

The Attack

I t is unlikely that there will be a public announcement
of the impending attack before it starts, since it would generate opposition.
Allies
do not want to be implicated and will deny any knowledge. Who will be officially
notified that an attack is about to take place? Most likely, Iran itself.

Direct conversations between the US and Iran are about to start, nominally
on the subject of Iraq only. They will also provide the only direct conduit
for the US to communicate with Iran without intermediaries. An “ultimatum” unacceptable
to Iran, as was delivered publicly
to Iraq on March 17th, 2003, could be delivered privately to Iran through
that route.

The reasons for our actions will be clear, the force measured, and the
cause just.

The initial US attack on Iranian facilities is likely to be “measured”: a
highly accurate strike on selected facilities “suspected” of bioweapons work,
with
cruise missiles launched from
submarines or ships in the Persian Gulf. That is a component of the
CONPLAN 8022 Global Strike mission, which
recently became operational and also includes
nuclear preemptive strikes.

The “clear” reasons and “just” cause for the administration to attack can
be stated as follows: if
a bird flu pandemic can cause 150 million deaths and there is even a one
percent probability that the
“intelligence” is right, i.e. even if there is a 99%
“uncertainty about the status of hidden programs”, the
expected number of deaths that would be prevented by bombing the Iranian
facilities is the product of those two numbers, i.e. 1.5 million, vastly larger
than the few thousand Iranian casualties due to “collateral damage.”

Any
military
reaction by Iran to the attack, perhaps even a verbal reaction, will be
construed as
“aggression” by Iran towards the US and Israel, and result in large scale
bombing of Iranian missile, nuclear and other facilities. Does that sound absurd?
Recall that
the US and
Britain bombed
Iraq’s no-fly zones well before the Iraq invasion, and Iraqi response was
labeled
“aggression toward planes of the coalition forces.”

Nuclear
earth penetrating weapons may be used in the initial attack, and
certainly will be used in the large scale attack that will follow.

Why will this happen? Because it was
“pencilled in” a long time ago. The
actions of the US against Iran in
recent years have been clearly directed towards a confrontation, to
suppress the rise of Iran as a strong regional power that does not conform
to US interests.

Can it be Prevented?

A
small group of thugs is about to lead America across
a line of no return. On the other side of this line there is no nuclear
taboo, no restraint on preemptive nuclear attacks on non-nuclear nations, and
no incentive for non-nuclear nations to remain non-nuclear. A global nuclear
war and the destruction of humanity will be a distinct possibility.

Americans are largely
unaware of what is about to happen.
Half a million people go to the streets on immigration law, yet nobody is
demonstrating against the Iran war that will radically change the life of Americans
for generations to come. The more informed sectors of society, scientists, arms
control organizations, the media, the political establishment, the military,
are not taking a strong stand against the impending war.
Congress is silent.

Only people in the know can stop this. Resigning from the job is not good
enough
[1],
[2],
[3]. People in the know
have to come forward with information that brings the impending attack to
the forefront of attention of Congress and the American public and thwarts it.
Not doing so is being complicit in a plan that will bring tragic consequences
to America and the world.

Else, all that will be left is to
bring the perpetrators to justice. Danton, Robespierre, Mussolini, Petain,
Ribbentrop, Goering, Ceausescu also occupied positions of power and prominence
at some point in their careers.

see you soon