Saturday, June 09, 2007

Fwd: new Vancouver 9/11 Conference video with Prof. Graeme MacQueen

Wayne <> wrote:

Dear Friends,

please view the new video presentation, made specifically for the Vancouver 9/11 Conference featuring Prof. Graeme MacQueen of McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, entitled:

9/11 Commission Report bars 503 1st responder eyewitnesses

This is a preview (10 minutes) of his presentation to the conference, June 22nd to 24th, which will be made available on DVD. Produced by Snowshoe Films

View it here:

Be sure to Rate it, make it a Fave and leave comments !

(You need to register to do that, but it is quick and easy)

E-mail the link to your friends and contacts, and if you have a website, please feature it, by using the embed code:


We need your support to make this conference a success and to make real impact for 9/11 Truth in this country and around the world.

If you can't attend, please donate. We are a small, volunteer, non-profit organization and have no corprate sponsorship. Hosting this event and getting some big name speakers here, their flights, accommodations, and advertising the venue costs a lot of money. If you want the truth to come out, justice to be done and to stop the insane wars, please help us.

Thanks for your support!


-- Vancouver 9/11 Truth Society

Paris Hilton ordered back to jail; Bush still free

News Update from Citizens for Legitimate Government
08 Jun 2007
Breaking: Paris Hilton ordered back to jail; Bush still free 08 Jun 2007 Screaming and crying, Paris Hilton was escorted out of a courtroom and back to jail Friday after a judge ruled that she must serve out her entire [discriminatory] 45-day sentence behind bars rather than in her Hollywood Hills home. [*Why* are Bush, Cheney Halliburton, Rice, Rumsfeld, Rove, Gonzales and 'Scooter' Libby free --while Paris Hilton is imprisoned 45 days for a traffic violation?!?]

Please forward this update to anyone you think might be interested. Those who'd like to be added to the Newsletter list can sign up: Please write to: for inquiries.

CLG Newsletter editor: Lori Price, Manager. Copyright © 2007, Citizens For Legitimate Government ® All rights reserved. CLG Founder and Chair is Michael Rectenwald, Ph.D.

WPTZ: Officials: No Raid Planned On Tax Evaders, Supporter Detained

PLAINFIELD, N.H. -- State, local and federal authorities swarmed the small town of Plainfield on Thursday, fueling speculation that they had come to arrest a couple convicted of tax evasion, but officials said that was not the case.
Ed and Elaine Brown were convicted in January of hiding nearly $2 million in income and not paying taxes on it because they insisted that federal income taxes are invalid. In April, they skipped their sentencing hearings and have been holed up in their house since.
Neighbors spotted heavily armed police near the 110-acre property Thursday morning, but officials said that they were just there to serve a warrant on a dental office owned by the couple in Lebanon

U.S. Marshal Stephen Monier said that the fire trucks, SWAT tanks and bomb disposal unit that were sent to the Plainsfield property were there only to do surveillance of the area.
"We have no wish to have a violent encounter with them or in any way, shape or form have to hurt either one of them," Monier said.
For several hours, authorities closed off the road leading to and from the Brown property. After police left, Ed Brown donned a tricorner hat when speaking to a reporter. He said his court conviction means nothing to him because the person once known as Ed Brown is now deceased.
"I'm not Ed Brown," he said. "I am Edward, a living soul created of the Creator, body of the Lord."
Brown called Thursday's police activity "childish."
Officials said they never had any intention to arrest Ed and Elaine Brown. The armored vehicles were seen leaving the area sometime after one of Ed Brown's supporters spotted authorities while he was walking a dog.
"A gentleman was walking a dog," Monier said. "Unfortunately, it required U.S. Marshal Service personnel during that encounter to take him into custody."
Brown said he would not surrender himself and begin serving his 63-month sentence. In the past, he predicted that police will attempt to invade his property, and he hinted it could be violent. Thursday, he warned that they should be wary of any man backed into a corner.
"Do I look like I'm dangerous?" Ed Brown said. "But I could be. But I could be."
Heavily armed agents seized the dental office run by Elaine Brown in Lebanon. Authorities said the show of force there was precautionary.

Tucker Carlson interviews Ron Paul
rate this and save it to your
MSNBC's Tucker Carlson invites Ron Paul to give 'freedom tutorial'


Friday, June 08, 2007

Lost Ed Brown Interview + InfoMixtape vs. New Waco?

Hey Folks,

Below is a one-hour interview I played on CKLN Radio called "Ed Brown - Death and Taxes" that anyone can download and use, as well as
others. Mr. Brown was kind enough to teach me some incredible stuff, and I strongly suggest reaching out to other artists who can
understand the immediacy of the situation and translate it for the masses.





Black Krishna Brand

Philosophy -

Music -

MySpace -

YouTube -

Archive -


Welcome to 21st Century Propaganda...

We hope you enjoyed your stay and will be leaving shortly...

South Park breaks down the herd better than anyone...

Spread the worrrd... :-)


Welcome to the 911 Truth DVD Project Web Site


Amnesty Bill 1348 DEFEATED!
S. 1348: A bill to provide for comprehensive immigration reform and
for other purposes News results for Immigration Reform Bill

Portable Planet US Immigration Reform Bill Stalls in Senate - 10
hours ago
An immigration-reform bill that had President Bush's strong
backing has failed to advance in a key Senate vote, delaying action
on the immigration issue ...Voice of America - 1718 related articles »
Immigrants Divided Over Reform Bill - Forbes - 90 related articles »
McCain stands alone on immigration bill - CNN - 484 related articles »

View all web results for Immigration Reform Bill

Philadelphia Daily News US Immigration Reform Bill Stalls in Senate
Journal of Turkish Weekly, Turkey - 5 hours ago
Dealing a significant blow to President Bush, bipartisan efforts to
move major immigration reform legislation ahead in the Senate have
failed, ...
Immigration reform bill dealt major blow Chicago Tribune
US Immigration Reform Bill Stalls in Senate Men's News Daily
We Could Soon Know If The Immigration Reform Bill Will Survive
The ...
all 1,826 news articles » Immigration reform bill stalls in
Senate after cloture vote fails
JURIST - 50 minutes ago
Opponents of the immigration reform bill say it amounts to "amnesty"
for up to 12 million undocumented immigrants currently in the United
States, ...
End In Sight For Debate On US Immigration Reform Bill?
JBS ACTION ALERT: Oppose the Passage of Immigration Bill S.1348 !
John Birch Society
South Asian group slams proposed US immigration bill Economic Times
Irish Echo - PR Newswire (press release)
all 8 news articles »
From: "Americans for Legal Immigration" <listmaster@>
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 8:15 PM
Subject: Ding Dong The Scamnesty Bill Is DEAD !!! We have WON!

You have defeated Scamnesty Bill S. 1348 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Last year the amnesty bill passed the Senate and we had to stop it in

This year, thanks to a historic backlash from the American public, our
side advances! We have stopped this amnesty in the Senate!

This is a great advance for our side!

The bill failed on two Cloture votes today. Senator Reid, McCain,
Graham, and the other Sellouts are out of time!

They are out of time because each day that goes by more Americans
find out about this terrible bill and the resistance grows!

Senator Reid has just announced he is taking the Senate Scamnesty
Bill off the Senate floor!

This bill is DEAD! Thanks to you! Some of the bills sponsors are
reported to be literally crying!

The tide has turned towards enforcement.

We The People have defeated ...

President George Bush!
Michael Chertoff!
The Sellout Senators!
The US Chamber of Commerce!
and the other usual suspects.

This is a historic night! Our hats are off to you ALIPAC and our
Our hats are off to all of the Americans that stood up and told these
sellouts No and Hell No!

It is time to celebrate this historic victory for our cause! Here's to
you America!

William Gheen
Americans for Legal Immigration PAC


Breaking News

Senate Blocks Final Vote on Immigration Reform Bill

Immigration bill fails crucial vote

Thank you for receiving our e-mail alerts. To continue and strengthen
efforts, we encourage each person receiving our alerts to also sign
up as
a Contributor and Volunteer. You can sign up as a Volunteer and as a
Contributor using our secure features on the top blue tool bar at

Thousands of concerned Americans like you make our efforts possible.
you have any questions about Contributing or Volunteering, please


The following physical address is associated with this mailing list:

Post Office Box 30966
Raleigh, NC 27622-0966

SWAT Team visits Tax Protester Ed Brown

Naive To Believe Ed Brown Events Were Not Preparation For Future SiegeWould police erect roadblocks, close airspace, evacuate neighbors, cut phone and power lines, descend with SWAT team, APC's to simply serve a warrant?

Thursday, June 07, 2007

Fwd: Check out Official: Cheney Urged Wiretaps -

_Official: Cheney Urged Wiretaps - washingtonpost.com_

Ron Paul in 08 will stop all this .

Repudiation, Not Impeachment

Repudiation, Not Impeachment
By Scott Ritter
Thursday 31 May 2007

It is a question I am faced with at every public event I
in: What are my views on the impeachment of President Bush and others
his administration? Generally, the question is preceded by an
statement listing the "crimes" which Mr. Bush is accused of
and the questioner has already found him guilty. Whether it is the war
in Iraq, conspiracy theories about 9/11, Hurricane Katrina, or any
variation of the theme of constitutional abuse of power, the one thing
all of the questioners have in common (besides the desirable outcome)
their singular conviction that the president is guilty.

I have considerable sympathy for this stance. I myself have
on more than one occasion that I believe President Bush has lied to
Congress and the American people about the reasons for going to war
Iraq (i.e., the whole WMD/al-Qaida intelligence
fabrication/misrepresentation fiasco). I also believe that the
president's sanctioning of warrantless wire-tapping, along with a
of other abuses of power stemming from the Patriot Act approved by
Congress after Sept. 11, 2001, likewise constitutes grounds for
impeachment. Several Democrats in Congress are actually discussing the
possibility of impeachment of President Bush and the irrepressible
Congressmen Dennis Kucinich has actually introduced articles of
impeachment for Vice President Dick Cheney.

Even some Republicans are getting on board the impeachment
bandwagon, although with caveats. "Any president who says 'I don't
or 'I will not respond to what the people of this country are saying
about Iraq or anything else' or 'I don't care what the Congress does,
am going to proceed' - if a president really believes that, then there
are ... ways to deal with that," Sen. Chuck Hagel, a Republican from
Nebraska, said of President Bush in obvious reference to impeachment.

Hagel is correct: Impeachment is the constitutional remedy for a
unilateral president whose governance is an insult to traditional
American democratic norms and values. However, impeachment alone is
simply a measure which addresses the symptoms of a larger malaise that
has stricken America. The arrogance associated with the concept of the
unitary executive is prevalent throughout mainstream American
life. The passivity of the legislative branch is one byproduct of the
dominance of the unitary executive. It is also an indicator that the
will of the people, as expressed through their election of the
representatives to the Congress of the United States, no longer has
weight and bearing long associated with the American democratic

Any effort to impeach Bush and any of his administration found
to be
engaged in activities classifiable as "high crimes and misdemeanors"
would fail to rein in the unitary executive core of any successor. One
only has to listen to the rhetoric of the Democratic candidates for
president to understand that this trend is as deeply rooted among them
as it is with President Bush. Americans today look for leaders without
recognizing the absolute necessity of electing team players. The
Founding Fathers deliberately designed the executive branch to be
and independent, but also made sure, through an elaborate system of
checks and balances, that it operated merely as one of three separate
but equal branches of government.

The "in your face" efforts of the Bush administration to minimize
the role of Congress and to achieve political control of the judiciary
are simply more public manifestations of trends that occurred in a
quiet fashion in past administrations, Republican and Democratic
When America elects a leader who states clearly that he or she will
with their equal partners in governance, the Congress, for the good of
the country, and who will acknowledge the supremacy of law set forth
the form of binding legislation passed by the will of Congress void of
any limiting or contradicting "presidential signing statement," then
will finally have a leader who is truly worthy of the title "President
of the United States of America."

But this will not happen of its own volition. The impeachment of
President Bush would not in and of itself terminate executive
unilateralism. It would only limit its implementation on the most
visible periphery, driving its destructive designs back into the
of government, away from the public eye, and as such, public
accountability. Impeach President Bush, yes, if in fact he can be
charged with the commission of acts which meet the constitutional
standard for impeachment (and I believe he could, if Congress only had
the will to do its job). But to truly heal America, we must repudiate
everything President Bush stands for, in terms of not only public and
foreign policy, but also in terms of his style of governance, since
former is derived from the latter.

Repudiation is a strong term, defined as "rejecting as having no
authority or binding force," to "cast off or disown," or to "reject
disapproval or condemnation." In my opinion, the complete repudiation
the presidency of George W. Bush is the only recourse we have
collectively as a people to not only seek redress for the wrongs
committed by the Bush administration, but also to purge society of
cancer that threatens to consume and destroy us as a whole, and which
would continue to manifest itself in our system of governance even
any impeachment proceedings.

Like any cancerous growth, the Bush administration has attached
malignancy to the American nation in a cruel fashion, its poisonous
tentacles stretching deep into our national fabric in a manner that
makes difficult the task of culling out the healthy from the diseased.
But we cannot truly repudiate something without its complete and utter
elimination from our midst. As such, there must be a litmus test to
us differentiate the good from the bad, that which must be restored
that which must be eliminated. For me, there is only one true test:
of constitutionality. There will be those who argue, and have argued,
that the time is well past for an oppressed people (and one would be a
fool not to comprehend that under the Bush administration, the
people have in fact been oppressed) to rely on the niceties of legal
argument, especially when the system of law we seek to use in our
defense has been so thoroughly corrupted by those who seek to impose

I was recently in Ireland, where I delivered a presentation on
current situation in the Middle East. In criticizing the Bush
administration's policies, I launched into a staunch defense of the
Constitution of the United States and decried what I believed to be
inadequacies of Congress and the American people in defending their
constitutional inheritance. Afterward, I was confronted by an Irishman
who challenged me on the validity of our Constitution. As he pointed
out, none other than President Thomas Jefferson himself, the author of
the Declaration of Independence and a proponent of constitutional law,
is famously quoted as saying, "The tree of liberty must be refreshed
from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its
natural manure." If, as I maintained, the Bush administration was
deviating so far off course from the ideals and values set forth in
Constitution, was it not time for a new American Revolution
to "refresh"
liberty with "the blood of patriots and tyrants?"

There can be no doubt that Jefferson was a promoter of
resistance to
the forces of tyranny. It was he who, after all, who penned the famous
words proclaiming the need for American independence from the tyranny
British rule: "That whenever any Form of Government becomes
of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish
and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such
principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall
most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness ...when a long train
abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a
design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it
their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards
their future security."

If faced with a situation today in which the American people felt
that our current form of government sought to imprison them "under
absolute Despotism," would we not be obligated to apply "natural
in an effort to refresh the "tree of liberty?"

Short of a complete and total abdication on the part of the
Congress, the collapse of the judiciary system, and a shocking
by those men and women who wear the uniform of the armed forces of the
United States to lend force of arms to the will of a dictatorial
president, I cannot ever envision a time in which conditions in these
United States could deteriorate to the point that a violent revolution
"of the people and by the people" would be required to restore
constitutional legitimacy and authority. Having said that, I remind
reader that with so few Americans professing any working understanding
of the Constitution, it is difficult to speak of people defending that
which they remain ignorant of.

While I reject violence as a means of redressing social wrongs,
especially when applied to issues of governance, and instead rely on
rule of law as manifested by the Constitution and those legitimate
bodies empowered by the Constitution to remedy every situation, I
help but fear the moment when the foundation of legitimacy which
who we are and what we are as a nation fades away into irrelevance
amidst a sea of complacency and ignorance. There is no greater
ground for the forces of tyranny than the surrender of civic
responsibility on the part of those entrusted with the defense of
liberty. And in this I do not mean the Congress of the United States,
but rather the people of the United States, the duly elected
representatives of whom constitute the Congress.

I fear not the bloody rebellion of an outraged citizenry, but
the passive submission of a shameful mass which betrays the cause of
liberty and freedom through the abandonment of the Constitution, and
obligations of citizenship derived thereof, in favor of the narcotic
consumerism. Such a mass, foreswearing blind obedience to those who
profess how to best construct a cocoon that immerses the occupant in
transitory comfort, is the most pressing problem facing America today.
In a nation whose defining document begins, "We the People," I find
it is we the people who constitute the greatest threat to the future
America. It is not through the force of our actions, but rather the
vacuum created by our inaction and apathy, a vacuum all too readily
filled by those who would have us exchange our hard-fought freedoms
a gilded cage of market-driven consumerism.

This is the main reason why I am not a proponent of the 'impeach
now' mentality so prevalent in political circles that oppose George W.
Bush. The expediency of impeachment simply replaces one source of
tyranny (President Bush) with another (whomever replaces him). It is
the failures of an individual that have gotten us to where we are
but rather the failure of the collective. So before we speak of
impeachment and the notion of executive accountability, I would like
address the issue of repudiation and the necessity of civic

Whatever field I endeavored to participate in, - whether as a
football player in college, an officer in the Marines or a firefighter
today, - whenever the going got tough, it was always pounded into my
head to fall back on "the basics." That is to say, a foundation of
from which everything else was derived. By adhering to
these "basics," I
and others were able to navigate whatever treacherous course we were
attempting, more often than not with success. As such, in formulating
coherent response to the challenge put to me by the Irishman
the need to "fertilize the tree of liberty," I find myself falling
on the "basics" of citizenship, to seek out the fundamentals of
individual responsibility in the American democratic experiment. And
there is no better source for these fundamentals than the most
defender of the individual American - Thomas Jefferson himself.

Jefferson was in France during the drafting of the Constitution,
did not play a direct role in negotiating its content. But such was
heft as a founder of America that his opinion was sought by many of
those who were so engaged. One of these critical players, James
(who later became the fourth President of the United States, following
Jefferson), wrote a letter to Jefferson shortly after the
Convention finished its work in September 1787, and prior to
ratification, interpreting critical aspects of the Constitution. I
Madison's words to be worthy of consideration when addressing the
of citizenship and responsibility.

"In the American Constitution," he wrote on Oct. 24, 1787, "the
general authority will be derived entirely from the subordinate
authorities. The Senate will represent the States in their political
capacity; the other House will represent the people of the States in
their individual capacity. The former will be accountable to their
constituents at moderate, the latter at short periods. The President
also derives his appointment from the States, and is periodically
accountable to them. This dependence of the General on the local
authorities seems effectually to guard the latter against any
encroachments of the former; whilst the latter, within their
limits, will be continually sensible of the abridgement of their
and be stimulated by ambition to resume the surrendered portion of

In short, Madison underscored the fundamental role of the people
the chain of accountability, and the necessity of their informed
involvement if the system of American constitutional governance was to
work. A breakdown on the part of the "general authority" would lead to
chaos and anarchy. Likewise, the failure of the "subordinate
inclusive of the people, to hold the "general authority" in check
facilitate the slide toward tyranny and oppression.

Jefferson himself, before the convening of the Constitutional
Convention, had long reflected on the issues of constitutional
government. Just as Jefferson's rendering of the Declaration of
Independence drew from his earlier work, "A Summary View of the Rights
of British America," so, too, were his views on the American
Constitution drawn from his earlier writings on issues pertaining to
Constitution of Virginia, which are contained in a collection of work
dating from 1781-82 known as "Notes on Virginia." The purpose of a
Constitution, Jefferson wrote, was " ... to bind up the several
of government by certain laws, which, when they transgress, their acts
shall become nullities; to render unnecessary an appeal to the people,
or in other words a rebellion, on every infraction of their rights, on
the peril that their acquiescence shall be construed into an intention
to surrender those rights."

Here Jefferson himself answers the question of the need to
"fertilize" the "tree of liberty" with the blood of rebellion: It is
required, nor desired, so long as a system of rule by law (i.e., a
Constitution) is present and adhered to. The importance of a
Constitution in preserving the character of a nation through
was paramount in Jefferson's view. "It is true," he argued in
his "Notes
on Virginia," that "we are as yet secured against tyrannical laws by
spirit of the times. ... But is the spirit of the people an
a permanent reliance? Is it government? Is this the kind of protection
we receive in return for the rights we give up? Besides, the spirit of
the times may alter, will alter. Our rulers will become corrupt, our
people careless."

Today one only needs to observe the corruption of our rulers and
carelessness of our people to understand the significance of the
Constitution when it comes to preserving these United States of
The nefarious nature of the Bush cancer is that, in its infection of
American system, it seeks to draw legitimacy for its tyrannical
by citing the very same Constitution it seeks to destroy. The
of this point of view cite the academic term "Unitary Executive
when defining their philosophy. To me, it is nothing less than
The Founding Fathers, in discussing the concept of a "unitary
executive," made use of the term in a manner reflective of their
to restrain executive power, versus the extreme interpretation
by counsels to President Bush and Vice President Cheney who seek to
expand executive power and authority to near dictatorial levels,
especially during a time of war. The tendency on the part of President
Bush to obviate the role of Congress is well documented, in matters
pertaining to governance in times of peace as well as war. The
unprecedented number of presidential signing statements issued by Bush
speaks volumes to this trend. These signing statements, historically a
device used by executives to protect presidential prerogative when it
comes to how a bill might be interpreted in a court of law, have been
used by the Bush administration to negate the legal impact of a given
piece of legislation by clearly stating the intent of the president to
act in a manner inconsistent with the letter of the law. That the
president believes he has a right to conduct himself in this manner is
the height of hubris; that Congress continues to facilitate this
behavior unchallenged represents the depth of legislative depravity.

It would be interesting to have a national debate on the concept
a "unitary executive," where the proponents would cite the "vesting
clause" (Article II, Section 1) of the Constitution, which
states, "The
executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of
America." The advocates of a "unitary executive" combine the "vesting
clause" with Article II, Section 3, Clause 4, the "take care" clause,
which states that the president must "take care that the laws be
faithfully executed" to make a case for a seamless hierarchy of power
solely vested in the executive. Stephen Calabrisi and Kevin Rhodes
staked out this argument in their 1992 article, "The Structural
Constitution: Unitary Executive, Plural Judiciary," in the Harvard Law
Review (Issue 105, 1992). The foundation of their argument is drawn
a backwards reading of the Constitution, which addresses the issue of
"Mandatory Jurisdiction" as set forth in the "vesting clause" not of
executive, but rather the judiciary, in Article III of the

By establishing a link between the exclusive authority of the
derived from the "vesting clause" of Article III, Calabrisi and Rhodes
argue that a similar exclusive authority, this time for the executive,
is derived from the "vesting clause" of Article II.

Of course, the Constitution was not written from back to front,
should neither be read nor interpreted from back to front. Missing
the entire dynamic of the underlying theory of the proponents of a
"unitary executive" is the pressing reality of the Constitution
in particular the "vesting clause" of Article I, Section 1, which
that "All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a
Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and
of Representatives."

Likewise, Calabrisi and Rhodes ignore Article I, Section 8, which
enumerates the powers of Congress, and Article I, Section 8, Clause 18
(the "necessary and proper" clause), which states that Congress shall
have all the power "[t]o make all Laws which shall be necessary and
proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other
Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United
States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."

The "necessary and proper" clause gained preeminence with the
landmark case of "McCulloch v. Maryland," decided by the Supreme Court
in 1819. The decision by Chief Justice Marshall clearly established
principle that that the Constitution grants to Congress implied powers
for implementing the Constitution's express powers, in order to
create a
functional national government. Marshall noted that the "necessary and
proper" clause "purport[s] to enlarge, not to diminish the powers
in the government. It purports to be an additional power, not a
restriction on those already granted." Marshall went on:
This government is acknowledged by all, to be one of enumerated
The principle, that it can exercise only the powers granted to it,
seem too apparent, to have required to be enforced by all those
arguments, which its enlightened friends, while it was depending
the people, found it necessary to urge; that principle is now
universally admitted.

That Chief Justice Marshall was speaking about the Congress of
United States when addressing the issue of the expansion of enumerated
power should not be missed by those who seek to invalidate the theory
and practice of a "unitary executive."

The sad fact is, however, there are far too few Americans who are
equipped and/or prepared to engage in a constitutional discussion, not
to mention one of this magnitude. Having failed to read and comprehend
this vital cornerstone of America, they are poorly positioned to come
its defense in this, the Constitution's time of need. You cannot
that which you remain ignorant of. Thomas Jefferson, in an 1802 letter
to his friend and confidant, Joseph Priestly, noted that, "Though
written constitutions may be violated in moments of passion or
yet they furnish a text to which those who are watchful may again
and recall the people. They fix, too, for the people the principles of
their political creed." Thus, an American people ignorant of their
Constitution remain a people collectively void of principle or creed.
Given that state of affairs that is the American body politic today,
this is a harsh yet far too accurate indictment of the state of

Those who espouse the nobility of patriotism by extolling Article
II, Section 4 of the Constitution, which addresses the issue of
impeachment of the president and vice president, are all too mute
the remainder of that great document. Whether this silence is derived
from negligence or ignorance, or a combination thereof, is not the
point. What lies at the heart of this issue is that void of a solid
foundation of "creed," as Thomas Jefferson put it, to fall back on in
times of constitutional crisis derived from the abuse of power and
authority. The American people have only a bottomless pit as their
support, and this is no support at all. Impeach President Bush? Maybe,
if due process dictates. Repudiate President Bush? Absolutely,
especially if one aspires for an America that truly matches the
and ideals set forth by the Founding Fathers.

Repudiate the notion of a "unitary executive."

Repudiate presidential signing statements.

Repudiate executive violation of Article 6 of the Constitution,
which binds municipal law in America with binding treaty obligations
incurred when the Senate ratifies a treaty or agreement by a two-
majority or better.

Repudiate "faith-based initiatives" pushed by any branch of

Repudiate a weak Congress.

Repudiate weak senators or representatives, especially those
with a
track record of abrogating their constitutional mandate.

Repudiate ignorance, especially that of the American citizen who
knows little or nothing about the Constitution which empowers him or

Repudiate consumerism, especially the virulent form it takes in
selfish framework of American-centric capitalism.

Repudiate pre-emptive wars of aggression.

Repudiate American Empire.

Instead, embrace the empowerment of education. Embrace active
citizenship. Embrace the rule of law, as set forth by the
Do all of this and, in the end, if conditions and circumstance
impeach President Bush and any of those in his administration so

Thomas Jefferson was prescient in his musings to another
Moses Robinson, in 1801 when he wrote, "I sincerely wish ... we could
see our government so secured as to depend less on the character of
person in whose hands it is trusted. Bad men will sometimes get in and
with such an immense patronage may make great progress in corrupting
public mind and principles. This is a subject with which wisdom and
patriotism should be occupied."

That wise American patriots would be so occupied today is my wish
and dream.

--- End forwarded message ---

Wednesday, June 06, 2007

Reporter Arrested on Orders of Giuliani Press Secretary

Reporter Arrested on Orders of Giuliani Press Secretary
4 min - Jun 6, 2007
Reporter Arrested on Orders of Giuliani Press Secretary

World Waking Up

Debunking FDR Debunking

Debunking FDR Debunking

The following is a copy and paste so some links may not work directly... for full article, please visit...

In the spirit of DRG's latest book "Debunking 9/11 Debunking", i thought i would put together an article for those to help out with the most common so-called "Debunks" of our work.

Claim - There are No pilots at
All above names who are pilots certified by the FAA can be cross referenced here...

Claim - The FDR is missing 2-6 seconds of data
FDR Recorders built to .5 sec lag maximum standard
Radar Altitude Confirms too high

Claim - There is altimeter lag in the animation and csv file due to flying outside the aircraft envelope.

Airdata Calibration and Measurement

FDR Vertical Speed - Altimeter lag issues Addressed

Radar Altitude Confirms too High

Reserved - more info forthcoming

Claim - The Information that P4T has analyzed may not be from the NTSB (P4T may have fabricated the information and claims it came from the NTSB)

csv file download and cover letters provided by Undertow

Raw data decode provided by Undertow

Animation cover letters/envelope provided by Snowgrouch

Animation cover letters provided by Mick Harrison

Reserved - More forthcoming
Animation provided by Third party on google video

George Washington University NTSB Data


NTSB FOIA Contact - Melba D. Moye
NTSB FOIA Request form -

Claim - The csv file and animation show a heading along the official flight path. csv file heading does not line up perfectly with physical damage
csv file was altered to show southern approach
Animation Alterations, Citgo Gas Station Video, witnesses

Claim - Pilots For 9/11 Truth has not provided all the data
We have provided all data which pertains to all published research and analysis that is not proprietary in nature. All information/data can be found on links above. The only information we cannot and do not provide is a proprietary Data Frame Layout which does not change our analysis in any way. Undertow can expand on this more when he sees this post.

Claim - Cover Letter Dated March 22, 2007 says Animation not "Official" that its a "working copy" Animation cover letter provided by Mick Harrison
Animation isnt the only information we have. We also have a Raw file and csv file (see above). However, the cover letter states the animation "was not used for official purpose" which means it was never used in an investigation. It is an official copy since it was officially provided through the Freedom Of Information Act and from the NTSB. The NTSB notes in the cover letter that they want everything as accurate as possible when providing information through the FOIA, however they note one error which was made to the clock annotation. They do not account for any other possible errors regarding the animation in this cover letter.

Given the fact that all we really need is the last data point - we offer the following article. FDR Recorders built to .5 sec lag maximum standard

These are some of the most common arguments when discussing Pilots For 9/11 Truth analysis regarding the information provided by the NTSB. I will add common arguments as they arise. Hope this is helpful for those defending the analysis/research. For original thread in our forums..


Melted Glass spheres in WTC dust

2007 ...File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat
There are three reports establishing melted glass spheres in WTC dust
and plume. emissions. 155, 156, 157. This indicates high enough
temperatures to both ... - Similar pages - Note

The problem with Ron Paul is that he tells the truth

The problem with Ron Paul is that he tells the truth.

Seeing a skunk at the garden party, Saul Anuzis, chairman of the Michigan Republican Party, threatened after the second Republican debate to organize a petition drive among Republican National Committee members to ban Texas Congressman Ron Paul from participating in further debates.

Also calling for Paul to be excluded from future debates is conservative writer Dean Barnett. In one short column, Barnett called Paul "daffy," a guy with a "missing screw," "bonkers," "the very definition of a crank," and "cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs."

Supporters of Rep. Paul, residing "firmly on the lunatic fringe," are demonstrating a "lack of lives," said Barnett.

Bill Bennett, author of The Book of Virtues and video poker fame, also wants Paul out of the picture, as does Hugh Hewitt, executive editor of

The calls to excommunicate the heretic in their midst came after Paul, a longtime campaigner for a less interventionist U.S. foreign policy, was asked if the attacks of Sept. 11 had altered his view. Paul replied: "Have you ever read the reasons they attacked us? They attacked us because we've been over there. We've been bombing Iraq for 10 years. We've been in the Middle East – I think Reagan was right. We don't understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics. Right now, we're building an embassy in Iraq that is bigger than the Vatican. We're building 14 permanent bases. What would we say here if China was doing this in our country or in the Gulf of Mexico? We would be objecting. We need to look at what we do from the perspective of what would happen if somebody else did it to us."

Asked Fox News questioner Wendell Goler, "Are you suggesting we invited the 9/11 attack, sir?" Replied Paul: "I'm suggesting that we listen to the people who attacked us and the reason they did it. And they are delighted that we're over there because Osama bin Laden has said, 'I am glad you're over on our sand because we can target you so much easier.' They have already now, since that time, killed 3,400 of our men, and I don't think it was necessary."

Rudy Giuliani pounced. "May I comment on that?" he asked, taking the debate in a more adversarial direction. "That's really an extraordinary statement," he charged. "That's an extraordinary statement, as someone who lived through the attack of September 11, that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq. I don't think I've heard that before and I've heard some pretty absurd explanations for September 11."

With the audience responding with thunderous applause, Giuliani added, "And I would ask the congressman to withdraw that comment and tell us that he didn't really mean it."

Instead, Paul replied: "I believe very sincerely that the CIA is correct when they teach and talk about blowback. When we went into Iran in 1953 and installed the shah, yes, there was blowback. A reaction to that was the taking of our hostages, and that persists. And if we ignore that, we ignore that at our own risk. If we think we can do what we want around the world and not incite hatred, then we have a problem. They don't come here and attack us because we're rich and we're free. They come and they attack us because we're over there."

In his article "How Rudy won the second debate," Time magazine's Joe Klein reported that "Ron Paul offered Giuliani a historic slam-dunk," an easy shot that "reduced Paul to history."

Perhaps, but Paul has the historical facts on his side.

Bin Laden, along with several other Islamic militant leaders, issued fatwas in 1996 and 1998 declaring war, or jihad, on the United States and allied countries. War would come to America because "for over seven years the United States has been occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of places, the Arabian Peninsula, plundering its riches," and because of "the Americans' continuing aggression against the Iraqi people" and the subsequent "huge number of those killed, which has exceeded 1 million," etc.

Asked Pat Buchanan, "What does Rudy Giuliani think the political motive was for 9/11?" That we're too rich, too sexy?

"Ron Paul is no TV debater," Buchanan said. "But up on that stage, he was speaking intolerable truths."

June 5, 2007

Ralph R. Reiland [send him mail] is an associate professor of economics at Robert Morris University in Pittsburgh.

Tuesday, June 05, 2007

Fwd: Our suspicions confirmed: Experts Cast Doubt on Credibility of JFK Terror Plot

From: "Debbie Lewis" <>
To: <Undisclosed-Recipient:;>
Subject: Our suspicions confirmed: Experts Cast Doubt on Credibility of JFK Terror Plot
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2007 15:12:41 -0500

What's really going on?  That is the real question.
Sent to me from Out There TV:
Go to Original
    Experts Cast Doubt on Credibility of JFK Terror Plot
    Agence France-Presse
    Tuesday 05 June 2007
    An alleged plot to blow up fuel tanks and pipelines at New York's JFK airport had little chance of success, according to safety experts, who have questioned whether the plot ever posed a real threat.
    US authorities said Saturday they had averted an attack that could have resulted in "unfathomable damage, deaths, and destruction," and charged four alleged Islamic radicals with conspiracy to cause an explosion at the airport.
    But according to the experts, it would have been next to impossible to cause an explosion in the jet fuel tanks and pipeline. Furthermore, the plotters seem to have lacked the explosives and financial backing to carry out the attack.
    John Goglia, a former member of National Transportation Safety Board, said that if the plot had ever been carried out, it would likely have sparked a fire but little else, and certainly not the mass carnage authorities described.
    "You could definitely reach the tank, definitely start the fire, but to get the kind of explosion that they were thinking that they were going to get... this is virtually impossible to do," he told AFP.
    The fuel pipelines around the airport would similarly burn, rather than explode, because they are a full of fuel and unable to mix with enough oxygen.
    "We had a number of fires in the US. All that happens is a big fire," he said. "It won't blow up, it will only burn."
    Even if the attackers had managed to blow up a fuel tank, the impact would be limited, he said, citing the example of North Vietnamese forces attacking US fuel dumps during the Vietnam war.
    "They hit the fuel tanks with pretty big rockets. You would get a big fire but not a big explosion other than the rocket."
    "There is a difference between just exploding the tank and a huge explosion. The tank may explode and blow up some metal, but that certainly wouldn't go very far," he said.
    His comments contrasted with those of US Attorney Roslynn Mauskopf, who insisted at the weekend that "the devastation that would be caused had this plot succeeded is just unthinkable."
    Jake Magish, an engineer with Supersafe Tank Systems, also cast doubt on the credibility of the plot, saying: "The fantasy that I've heard about the people saying 'they will blow the tank and destroy the airport,' is nonsense."
    "There are people there responding to hysteria, I think. But from an engineering point of view, if someone is successful in blowing a hole into a tank, they will just have a fire from one tank.
    "There is no way for the fire to go from tank to tank, that is nonsense. It just won't happen."
    Besides the alleged plotters' capability, other questions have focused on the main source in the probe - a convicted drug dealer who infiltrated the group and whose sentence was pending as part of his cooperation with police.
    Neal Sonnett, a former federal prosecutor, told the New York Times there was also a danger in overstating how serious or sophisticated a plot really was.
    "There unfortunately has been a tendency to shout too loudly about such cases," he said. "To the extent that you over-hype a case, you create fear and paranoia," he said.
    The New York Times on Sunday pointedly avoided giving much coverage to the alleged plot, devoting only a brief on its front page continued on the local section, despite the story breaking in the early afternoon on Saturday.

See what's free at

Get the Yahoo! toolbar and be alerted to new email wherever you're surfing.

Another 9/11 documentary

[Fwd: Re: 911 research]

Ok Ben,
I will do the interview with you, send the questions. I may want to publish your thesis on my site, and pass it around the 9/11 Truth Community. Will that be ok with you? Thanks,
> Hello Alf
>>Hey my name is Ben McHolme and I am from Sydney, Australia and currently attend Grade 12 (final year) at Mosman High School. For one of the
>> subjects
>>called society and culture I have to do a Personal Interest Project
>> (PIP).
>>We are allowed to research anything we like and write a thesis on it. I have decided to do the September eleven conspiracy, the facts
>> disapproving
>>the accepted story and the affect it has had on the world, comparing America and Australia. A requirement of the PIP is qualitative research
>> and
>>I have decided to conduct some interviews with people who believe in the conspiracy and people who don't. If you agree to an interview via email I would be happy to send you some questions, if you would not like to participate, thanks for you time and very helpful website.
>>From Ben McHolme

Breaking: Libby sentenced to 30 months in CIA leak case

News Update from Citizens for Legitimate Government
05 Jun 2007
Breaking: Ex-Cheney aide I. Lewis 'Scooter' Libby has been sentenced to 30 months in the CIA leak case. Libby was also fined $250,000. Details forthcoming on CLG site.

Please forward this update to anyone you think might be interested. Those who'd like to be added to the Newsletter list can sign up: Please write to: for inquiries.

CLG Newsletter editor: Lori Price, Manager. Copyright © 2007, Citizens For Legitimate Government ® All rights reserved. CLG Founder and Chair is Michael Rectenwald, Ph.D.

Over Hill, Over Dale: The Militarization of Culture

Over Hill, Over Dale: The Militarization of Culture
By Charles Sullivan
ICH" -- -- A very disturbing commercial is being shown
on network television in the United States with alarming
regularity. I have seen it frequently during the past few weeks
on an NBC station that broadcasts from the nation’s capital,
Washington, DC.

It opens with a male chorus—perhaps a military choir--singing:
“Over hill, over dale; we have hit the dusty trail.” The song
has the cadence of a forced march. In muted light soldiers are
seen wading through fetid water with weapons aloft, while well
coordinated precision military operations are unfolding all
around, like a Rogers and Hammerstein musical. We are supposed
to be impressed with the military and technological prowess on
display, awed into admiration for it; awed into submission to
it, the oracle of our times.

As a montage of war images flicker across the screen, each of
them portraying military operations (none of them showing the
real horrors of war); a male voice extols the virtues of
technological warfare and the unification of all military
branches. Air force. Navy. Marines. Army. One force. The
commercial ends with the statement, “Northrop Grumman: Defining
the future.”

The infomercial clearly targets a male audience. Northrop
Grumman and other defense contractors are realizing staggering
profits from U.S. imperial policy in the Middle East and around
the globe. The social and environmental costs, as always, are
born by others. This is corporate welfare in its most hideous
form—socialized costs and privatized profits. It is parasitic
capitalism in its most malignant incarnation. It is the kind of
propaganda Americans are exposed to their every waking moment.

No one who views the advertisement is going to run out and buy
an advanced weapons system from Northrop Grumman. Thus one must
ponder the real purpose of the ad. The message is not designed
to sell weapons systems; it was created to sell the American
people on the notion of superior technological prowess,
perpetual warfare and war profiteering that guarantees, for a
little while longer, at least, an unsustainable way of life:
ideas that have already won widespread acceptance among the
slumbering masses and the willfully ignorant.

We are supposed to believe that the Military Industrial Complex,
a conglomeration of defense contractors with its long poisonous
tentacles firmly lodged in the gangrened flesh of government, is
protecting us and our way of life from a hostile world intent on
destroying both. We are supposed to see perpetual war in
Orwellian terms of peace; ignorance as strength, evil as good.
Destruction of the commons and our civil liberties by fascist
corporatism is supposedly good for the country because it is
good for the war profiteers in government and Northrop
Grumman—which is only the tip of a much larger malignancy rooted
deeply in the cadaverous flesh of American society.

If Northrop Grumman is indeed defining the future, America—and
the world—are in deep trouble. We are witnessing the blatant
militarization of our culture by the forces of darkness, the
machines of misery and death.

Hummers, a military vehicle, populate the roads and highways of
America, even as the last drops of cheap oil are being sucked
from the sands of the occupied territories. The human costs of
war that sustain patterns of conspicuous consumption and waste
never enter the minds of consumers. After all we are an
exceptional people. The costs are born by others and kept hidden
from view.

The glorification of war is nearly ubiquitous in the culture.
You see it in the vehicles we drive, aggressive behavior,
excessive national pride, flag waving, military style clothing,
movies, video games; and now—television commercials. The
American consumer is essentially becoming a piece of computer
hardware programmed to download propaganda and to execute its
commands without thinking. It does what it is programmed to do.

Northrop Grumman, the neocons, and their timorous accomplices in
Congress are all peddling the same bogus image to the American
people. Like the forces portrayed in the television ad, they are
a well financed, well organized array of seemingly disparate
forces fighting as one. Who are they fighting? We the people.
Democracy. Truth. Peace. Organized labor. Working class people
the world over.

Charles Sullivan is an architectural woodworker,
photographer, and social activist residing in the Ridge and
Valley Province of West Virginia. He welcomes your thoughts and
comments at

Just how sick and twisted are Republicans? Arkansas GOP chief: We need more 'att

Just how sick and twisted are Republicans? Arkansas GOP chief: We need
more 'attacks on American soil'.

"At the end of the day, I believe fully the president is doing the
right thing, and I think all we need is some attacks on American soil
like we had on [Sept. 11, 2001 ], and the naysayers will come around
very quickly to appreciate not only the commitment for President Bush,
but the sacrifice that has been made by men and women to protect this
country," Milligan said.

Monday, June 04, 2007

GOP chief: We need more terror attacks on US soil 'to appreciate' President Bush]

News Update from Citizens for Legitimate Government
04 Jun 2007
GOP chief: We need more terror attacks on US soil 'to appreciate' President Bush 03 Jun 2007 The Republican Party of Arkansas, which was beaten decisively in last year's election, needs to dedicate itself to running next time on an anti-tax, pro-highway and pro-education agenda, its new chairman [Bryant businessman Dennis Milligan] said... Milligan said he's "150 percent" behind Bush on the war in Iraq. "At the end of the day, I believe fully the president [sic] is doing the right thing, and I think all we need is some attacks on American soil like we had on [Sept. 11, 2001], and the naysayers will come around very quickly to appreciate not only the commitment for President Bush, but the sacrifice that has been made by men and women to protect this country," Milligan said.

Please forward this update to anyone you think might be interested. Those who'd like to be added to the Newsletter list can sign up: Please write to: for inquiries.

CLG Newsletter editor: Lori Price, Manager. Copyright © 2007, Citizens For Legitimate Government ® All rights reserved. CLG Founder and Chair is Michael Rectenwald, Ph.D.

Fwd: Who owns the American Media???

While this will not shock some of you, it should most definitely be an eye openner to the rest...It's 4 1/2 minutes...

8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time
with theYahoo! Search movie showtime shortcut.

Fwd: Who is the soldier...

Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 08:21:13 -0500

I've not seen this before, but this is...unusual.  Who, indeed, is the foreign soldier and what is going on?  Don't bother with the whole clip, unles you want to.  It is alittle over 9 minutes long.  Go into the clip about to the 3:26 minute mark and there is n interesting comment from one of the rescue workers.  Then skip head to the 4:18 minute mark.  That is were the foreign soldier comes in.  I do suppose that in the US, being as diverse as it is, we could possibly have a soldier with a foreign accent, but...

Need Mail bonding?
Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users.

Sunday, June 03, 2007

The Bilderberg Conference 2007, 31st May to 3rd June 2007, Istanbul

See who's who in the NWO

Usama Bin Laden: His Beverly Hills, CA, phone listing matches that of Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation



Subject: Usama Bin Laden

While doing research on 9/11 victims I found Usama Bin

Laden. His Beverly Hills, CA, phone listing matches

that of Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation and his

Bethesda, MD, address matches that of Bethesda

Interactive Solutions. I understand that the FBI is

offering $25 million with an additional additional $2

million from the Airline Pilots Association and the

Air Transport Association for the total of a $27

million dollar reward. I would like to know if the

reward is tax free and if I could please receive it in


Laden, Usama Bin

PO Box 0900

Beverly Hills, CA 90213-0900

(310) 369-1000


Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation

10201 W Pico Blvd

Los Angeles, CA 90064-2651

(310) 369-1000


Laden, Usama Bin

7972 Old Georgetown Rd, STE 4C

Bethesda, MD 20814-2477


Bethesda Interactive Solutions

7972 Old Georgetown Road Suite 4C

Bethesda, MD 20814

(301) 913-9775

Bethesda Interactive Solutions was founded in 2000, as

Millennium Technology Group, by Philip J. Schmitz,

Michael B. Sperling, Millard Bennett, Donald Sperling,

and Joseph Schmitz. Headquartered in Rockville, MD,

Millennium Technology Group provided expert technology

consulting and deployment services to local

Washington, DC Metro Area businesses.

The Rewards For Justice Program, United States

Department of State, is offering a reward of up to $25

million for information leading directly to the

apprehension or conviction of Usama Bin Laden. An

additional $2 million is being offered through a

program developed and funded by the Airline Pilots

Association and the Air Transport Association.

A Study in the Physics of Impact. WTC seismic/energy anomolies

What is astounding is the fact that the energy released in the 2nd collapse, is 2 times the energy released in the 1st collapse, and the energy released by the collapse of WTC 7 is less than .30 % of either prior collapse.

A study of the top 15 floors of the WTC Tower: Force at impact.
The top 15 floors of a WTC tower would impact the ground with about 6 times more force than was recorded by the Seismographs. Keep in mind, this is just the top 15 floors, there are 110 floors. Do you see a problem here?

Comparison of Energy Release of WTC 1 vs. WTC 2
joules of wtc 1/joules of wtc 2 = %
2 89125090/177827900 = 50.11% , There was twice as much energy released in the second collapse
89125090 (joules of first collapse) x 2 = 178250180
The question here is why would the Twin Towers not have Twin energy release?

Building 7 was about 1/2 the Height, and 1/3 the mass of the twin towers.
501187.2/177827900 = 0.2818 % = 501119
Less than one percent of the energy released by the 2nd collapse is released by building 7?

This is a great study, physicist must read.

by, Alfons