Home

13 Lies: An Abbreviated History of U.S. Presidents Leading Us to War

Leave a comment

 

David Redick
Activist Post

Those of you who long ago figured out that George Bush lied about, and twisted, 9-11, the role of Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and Osama, and WMDs to justify the invasions of Afghanistan, and Iraq, and to create the War on Terror, will not be surprised to learn that our prior Presidents, and their complicit henchmen, have lied us into every war since our Revolution. Their true reasons have not been legal, constitutional, or politically acceptable, so they invent one or more false reasons that they can sell to the people. The recent WikiLeaks disclosures confirm how our foreign policy is riddled with lies. Surprise!

Sadly, most people, especially the troops and their families, believe the lies and proudly support these “wars for defense of our Liberties.”  It doesn’t occur to them that our leaders would be so evil as to spend the lives of our troops to gain their hidden goals for Empire-USA (oil, power, land, etc.).  

Iran is their next target
Thus, the war drums are beating in DC to justify bombing Iran, so this is a good time to consider whether our leaders are lying again. READ MORE
 

The War On Terror

1 Comment

Live Link: Global Research, October 16, 2010

By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

__________________________________________________________

Does anyone remember the “cakewalk war” that would last six weeks, cost $50-$60 billion, and be paid for out of Iraqi oil revenues? 

Does anyone remember that White House economist Lawrence Lindsey was fired by Dubya because Lindsey estimated that the Iraq war could cost as much as $200 billion? 

Lindsey was fired for over-estimating the cost of a war that, according to Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes, has cost 15 times more than Lindsey estimated. And the US still has 50,000 troops in Iraq. More

An American Soldier Exposes – Kill Everybody

Leave a comment

One ex-soldier speaks out about the escalation of the wars.  Orders were given to “kill everybody”.   The soldiers know they were sent there on a lie; that they continue to fight a war because politicians refuse to end it.   

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqS4Vd0iD7I

The US should pull out of Washington D.C.

4 Comments

Thoughts to ponder:

Firearm death rates

AN INTERESTING LETTER IN THE AUSTRALIAN SHOOTER MAGAZINE, WHICH I QUOTE:

“If you consider that there has been an average of 160,000 troops in the Iraq theater of operations during the past 22 months, and a total of 2112 deaths, that gives a firearm death rate of 60 per 100,000 soldiers.

The firearm death rate in Washington, DC is 80.6 per 100,000 for the same
period.
That means you are about 25 per cent more likely to be shot and killed in
the US capital, which has one of the strictest gun control laws in the US
than you are in Iraq .

Conclusion: The US should pull out of Washington D.C.

Obey’s “Share our Sacrifice Act”: “Let those who worship the god of war, tithe to that god out of their own pockets”.

Leave a comment

Tell a Friend 

By: Marti Oakley  ALL RIGHTS RESERVED (c) copyright 2009

“Maybe congress and most especially Rep. Obey should submit a “get a conscience; honor your oath of office; honor the Constitution and serve the people who elected your sorry behind ” bill.”

SHARE OUR SACRIFICE?  HR 4130

I would start here by asking who the “our” is in this bill’s title?  Is he referring to the corporate US government?  I want to know what it is those included in the word “our”, are sacrificing? 

I would suggest that Rep. Obey and every other elected official who voted for funding, continued funding, continuing the misuse of our military for corporate benefit, do the right thing:  SHARE OUR SACRIFICE…….please, refuse any further congressional pay and, return all increases in wages and wages paid from the start of these wars you condoned in direct violation of the Constitution, with the full knowledge you were sending our troops to conduct a war on behalf of multi-national oil cartels.

Please forgo any perks associated with your position: limo services, private staff, golden fleece insurance and most especially the “retirement” payments you have supplied yourself even if you are convicted of a felony.  These few “sacrifices” on your part could save the country hundreds of millions of dollars each year and could be used to help offset the borrowing done using the land assets of everyday Americans.  After all, this seems a minor sacrifice compared to our military families having to bury their dead as they come home.  Its not as if any one of you actually represents the sovereign states or their citizens.  I see no reason to continue to pay you for “no services rendered”.     More

Top Ten Reasons for a New 9/11 Investigation

Leave a comment

Original article from:  Strike the Root

The Paradise Perspective:

Commentary from a Free and Compassionate Alternate Reality

Volume 1, Number 33

 

by Glen Allport

Exclusive to STR

Preface for 2009  

It has been two years since this column was first published, and despite a new Democratic administration and further scientific evidence debunking the Official Conspiracy Theory, the situation is largely unchanged. The United States is still occupying the nations of Iraq and Afghanistan, causing an appalling number of civilian deaths, creating resentment and hatred of the U.S. among the local populations, making the world a more dangerous place (according to three former CIA agents) and further bankrupting Americans in the process. Domestically, assaults continue on the rights and freedoms that America was once famous for. The mainstream media (and many on the Internet) continue to characterize those who sensibly disbelieve the Official Conspiracy Theory as “conspiracy theorists” and “nutjobs”; the ever-growing body of evidence against that official version of events continues to be ignored, downplayed, and misrepresented. The “Big Lie” theory espoused by Hitler has thus once again been proven correct. Few Americans are willing to put up with the discomfort of seeing things as they really are in this situation.  

Of the “further scientific evidence” mentioned above, I will highlight only one item: the finding, by an international team of scientists, that a huge amount of high-tech nano-thermite was used in the demolition of the World Trade Center buildings. The PDF of the study published in The Open Chemical Physics Journal  may be read here (25 pages) and is highly recommended.  

Beyond the higher numbers of casualties for both U.S. troops and locals in the occupied areas, little in the column below would merit change. If you have not yet been willing to face the unpleasant truth of this situation, I encourage you to to do so.

September 11, 2007

The List

Introduction

– 1 –

Epic Disaster and Failure All Around  

Six years ago, on September 11, 2001 , America ‘s staggeringly expensive defense system failed catastrophically. Four airliners were hijacked and then used as weapons; three were flown into buildings and the fourth crashed on the way to an unknown target. Three skyscrapers in New York were completely destroyed (although one had not been hit by a plane) and the Pentagon suffered serious damage. Almost three thousand lives were lost, and people are still suffering and dying from the aftereffects. Last Friday, Discover Magazine reported that “Up to 70 percent of first responders are ill as a result of 9/11 contamination. If a similar rate of illness holds true for those who lived and worked near the Twin Towers , the number of seriously ill New Yorkers could climb to 300,000 in the near future.”  

This disaster should have been prevented, but was not. The people and organizations charged with detecting and thwarting such an attack failed. Warnings were in fact given, but as is typical of government action, even the sincere efforts of dedicated individuals were not enough to prevent the organization as a whole from failing, in this case with horrific consequences.  

– 2 –

Accountability  

Imagine that a group of private firms had been in charge of defending America from attack on 9/11, and imagine these firms had failed as completely as did our own defense establishment on that day. What would have happened to those firms and to their executives in the wake of the attacks?  

Businesswoman Martha Stewart went to prison for five months merely for lying to investigators about a stock trade. Any corporation, small business, or other non-government organization responsible for the death of even a single person through negligence or failure of their product or service might well be taken to court, and those at the top charged with negligent homicide or other serious crime in regards the death. What on Earth would we have done to people responsible for the incredible failures of September 11 – if those people had not been highly placed in our own government?  

Not only have those responsible for this massive and deadly failure not been held accountable, they have been allowed to use their own failure as a blank check for staggering new police-state powers and for waging aggressive war against Afghanistan and Iraq – two nations which had neither attacked us nor even threatened to attack us, and which were in fact incapable of realistically threatening the most powerful nation on Earth.  

– 3 –

Using Grenades to Kill a Fly at a Dinner Party  

READ MORE

http://www.strike-the-root.com/72/allport/allport11.html

 

Scientific Supporting texts from ‘Banning Uranium Weapons’ seminar, UN Oct 8th 2008.

Leave a comment

Recent articles appearing here in the PPJ have elicited comments to the effect that depleted uranium does not pose any danger to land, water or persons.  Apparently there are many countries, scientists and other highly qualified people around the world who have a different view.  But…I suppose they are all just liars and not qualified to make such statements (sarc).

While researching to prove out the claims that DU presents no significant threat either to indigenous populations where it is used, or to military personnel who might be exposed to DU,( something that would make me feel much better) I noted that reports of exposure were not annotated in the health reports of veterans.  Also, that any attempts to set up regimented screening and testing to prove the assertion that DU was not a physical threat, all seemed to just fade into obscurity. 

Even the  [US ARMY TRAINING VIDEO: Depleted Uranium Hazard Awareness]   seems to be disregarded in its admonishments that DU contaminates water, soil and personnel and represents a significant threat to the health of those exposed to it.  This training video was made in the early 90’s…but until recently was never shown to military personnel.  Even now, it is on a limited basis.
 
 
ICBUW Science Team

The National Defense Authorization Act of 2007 signed into law by President Bush in October of 2006, contained legislation pertaining to depleted uranium. Section 716 called for a comprehensive study of the health effects of depleted uranium (DU) due to the use of DU weapons, to be completed within a year. The U.S. Department of Defense asked the National Research Council to oversee this project and the result was The Review of Toxicologic and Radiologic Risks to Military Personnel from Exposure to Depleted Uranium

http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11979  During and After Combat published by the National Academies of Sciences in 2008.

Although this is a scientific report and concludes the lungs would be the most available point of transfer of DU dust, it is conspicuously absent in actual testing of the lungs of those exposed to DU.

The report leaves out over two dozen recent peer-reviewed articles, mostly indicating potentially harmful effects of DU.

This document is in PDF format and can be read using Acrobat Reader.

A wide range of scientific articles and observations can be read at this same site.

http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/a/190.html    Critique of US NRC Report (57 Kb – Format pdf)

 

I also came across all of these efforts:

 

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-177

H.R. 177 Depleted Uraniums Testing and Screening Act

Submitted January 6, 2009  (Serano) 111th congress (sitting in committee)

 

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/109-h5303/show

H.R 5305 Depleted Uranium Munitions Suspension and Study Act of 2006

Submitted May 04, 2006 (MCKinney)

May 04, 2006: Referred to House International Relations  (never addressed)

 

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h109-2410 

H.R. 2410, The Depleted Uranium Munitions Act, 

Congressman Jim McDermott (D-WA) 109th congress & 110th congress (never addressed)

 

There are multiple bills that have been introduced since 2004 to establish testing, screening and protective measures for military personnel.  Each of them is routinely referred to one committee or another where they are allowed to die a quiet death.  These three are given only as example.

 

Twenty states have introduced or passed legislation regarding depleted uranium testing and study.  Connecticut had implemented their own law by the end of 2006 establishing a health registry for military personnel related to exposure to depleted uranium. At lest twenty other states are considering the same things.

 

April 10, 2007: Star Tribune (Minn., Mn.) reports a state Senate committee OK’d a bill providing for testing veteran national guardsmen returning from Iraq to see if dust from spent-uranium munitions has harmed them. Link: www.startribune.com/587/story/1112856.html.

 

 

There are still those who maintain that depleted uranium poses no health risks or environmental contamination.  If this is true, why do sites that have been exposed to these munitions have to be routinely [decontaminated]? Although I would like to believe DU poses no threat, the fact remains that if it didn’t, it wouldn’t be used.  The idea that it might possibly be poisoning the environment, causing damage to human beings must fall under the category of [collateral damage].  One of those unexpected perks of wars.

 

(C) 2009 Marti Oakley

.

 

 

Older Entries Newer Entries

%d bloggers like this: