Work On Your Aim, Damnit

American Scofflaw
Lisa Gallegos was taking a bath Wednesday morning when she heard a knock at the front door of her Eldorado-area home.

Assuming the person would leave, the 41-year-old construction contractor ignored it. Then she saw a shadow move past her bathroom window. Thinking it might be her father-in-law, who lives nearby and sometimes brings over paperwork, Gallegos called him on her cell phone. However, he said he wasn't there. He offered to come over, but Gallegos said she wasn't worried.

Next she heard a car engine and thought the person at the door was leaving. But the shadow passed by her bathroom window again.

"Then I hear a big bang," Gallegos said in a phone interview Wednesday evening, "and I knew someone was breaking into my house."

She jumped out of the bathtub, wrapped herself in a towel and grabbed the loaded .44 Magnum revolver she keeps by her bed.

"I thought, 'Someone is robbing my house and I'm not going to let this happen,' " Gallegos said. "I work hard for my stuff."

Holding her towel with one hand and the gun in the other, Gallegos crept quietly to the area of the home where she could hear two people rummaging around. One man was in her daughter's bedroom, while the other was in her office. Gallegos concentrated first on the man in her daughter's room.

"So I pulled up the gun and aimed it at the guy — he didn't see me — and I said, 'Get the (expletive) out of my house,' " she said. "He looks up and he comes toward me running. I was about to pull the trigger, and he sees the gun, and he goes to my right and out the door he came in."

The man had parked his dark blue, late 1990s sport-utility vehicle in her home's courtyard, and she saw him slam one of the doors shut. Gallegos said she was afraid he was going to retrieve a weapon, so she fired a round at his car. The man jumped into the vehicle, spun the wheels and drove out of the courtyard.

Gallegos then turned her attention to the man in the office, who shut the door when he heard the gunshot. She said she could hear him trying to get out a window. She went outside and saw the man in the SUV driving around her home, so she fired three more shots at him.

The man in the office fled out the window, and Gallegos saw him running across a field toward the SUV. Gallegos fired one shot at him and watched him fall to the ground. The man then got back on his feet and jumped into the SUV, and the vehicle sped away.

NoBama, Por Favor

By Gary Fleming
I voted for President Obama because he had no track record proving to me that his actions matched campaign promises. I didn't vote for the promises Dubya made eight or so years ago (more humbler foreign policy being one I fell for) and found out the lucky way that talk is cheap - it is action that really matters. I can't think of a single promise kept from the Bush campaign - I can't think of anything done by the Bush administration that helped anyone I personally know anywhere. That is a universal statement - and I mean it. That, I think, is saying a lot.

Fast forward to the Obama campaign. Perhaps you've heard the saying that "a sure sign of insanity is repeating the same action while expecting a different outcome each time." My lesson learned - don't vote for promises - vote on proven track records - don't make the same mistake twice. I should have supported Ron Paul based on his consistent record of action matching principals and promises. But forget that for now - Obama was elected - he's OUR president - yours and mine. (Apologies to non-American readers) I want to join the Obama supporters in supporting our new president. So far I don't think I can. Why?

Because the signs I've seen so far like (CLICK) this article where we read:
"Speaking to the State Department after Richard Holbrooke was appointed Special US Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, Obama said the worsening situation in the region poses a grave threat to what he called 'global security.'

"Afghanistan and Pakistan are the central front in the America's war against terrorism and the deteriorating situation in the region poses a grave threat to the global security. It's an international challenge of the highest order. That's why we are pursuing a careful review of our policy."

One problem I have with the statement above is the phrase "war against terrorism" which is really meaningless - or can mean anything anyone wants it to mean. It is a propagandistic phrase that we are all supposed to pretend we understand while none of us can define. I had hoped Obama was smart enough to understand that as Einstein said "a problem properly defined is half solved." What kind of problem statement is "war against terrorism?" What about things the U.S. military does that terrorize our foes? Are we at war against that terrorism too? This is not a word game - this is propaganda for public consumption - I'm not buying it. Sorry, Obama.

Here's another reason I'm concerned that Obama isn't changing much regarding America's empire-oriented foreign policy. (CLICK) This article reports:
"At least seven people were killed, most of them foreigners, in a suspected US missile strike in northwest Pakistan, bringing to 15 the number killed in such attacks on Friday, officials said.
Friday's suspected US missile strikes were the first since US President Barack Obama took office in Washington and came one day after he appointed veteran diplomat Richard Holbrooke special envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan."

Then I came across this video regarding the banking situation and those Obama has appointed to key positions:


I also found (CLICK) this article by Grossman describing appointments made by Obama regarding the military-industrial-scientific complex.

Here is (CLICK) another article reporting on troop buildups coming for Afghanistan. Why? What is the mission?

We also know Obama appointed Rahm Emanuel, a former Israeli soldier, as the second most powerful man in the country. I don't see how change will come to America's policy toward Israel - a policy I disagree with very much since it seems so one-sided. If you don't think Rahm was in the Israeli military, watch this video where he doesn't deny it:


Now I ask you, reader, if you voted for Obama like me, are these moves representative of the change you voted for? Do you believe these initial moves are helping America? Why? How? Help me to understand exactly what it is you had hoped Obama would change because so far I see more of the same.

I would appreciate comments - I'm not picking a fight - but I would love to get on board with the "change we can believe in."
e-mailgary@comcast.net

Day of Deceit???

American Scofflaw

There are several main topics of interest here:
(1) The US plan to provoke Japan to fire the first shot, so as to motivate an isolationist US public to join the war against Germany
(2) US intercepted Japanese Bomb Plot Grids for Pearl Harbor, but did not warn Kimmel
(3) Vacant Sea: US clears shipping out of the path of the Japanese carrier force, to prevent accidental discovery
(4) Myth of the radio silence of the Japanese carrier force
(5) US moved its aircraft carriers & modern warships away from Pearl Harbor, leaving only old ships to be sunk by the Japanese attack

Perhaps, out of dire necessity, Roosevelt had to deceive the American people in order to defeat Hitler. Perhaps the cost of several thousand lives was justified to bring down a greater evil. But why do we have to keep lying about it? Why can't our history books tell what actually happened?

If, as we're told, we live in a Decocracy, then the people, as rulers, need knowledge, not lies, to make informed judgment. Hence the importance of this book. It's the ONLY book on Pearl Harbor that makes the elite uncomfortable and attracts flak. Any pro-Nazi book would have no standing: whatever Roosevelt's sins, they were multiplied manifold in the Totalitarian regimes. But this book, moderate yet full of detail, based on archives that were opened after the Cold War and now have been partly closed again, is the one to read, to save, to publicise.

This material is not available elsewhere on the internet. Do not assume that this webpage will be here forever. Save it (with the three associated .jpg files) and disseminate it.

If you are interested in this topic, you need to buy the book. New copies are available at Amazon and elsewhere. Second-hand copies are plentiful, and selling from US$ 2.99. See the links at the bottom of this webpage.

The following video containing interviews with Robert B. Stinnett, and with his opponents - Budiansky and others:

Man In The Know

For a decade, Russian academic Igor Panarin has been predicting the U.S. will fall apart in 2010. For most of that time, he admits, few took his argument -- that an economic and moral collapse will trigger a civil war and the eventual breakup of the U.S. -- very seriously. Now he's found an eager audience: Russian state media.

Igor Panarin

In recent weeks, he's been interviewed as much as twice a day about his predictions. "It's a record," says Prof. Panarin. "But I think the attention is going to grow even stronger."

Prof. Panarin, 50 years old, is not a fringe figure. A former KGB analyst, he is dean of the Russian Foreign Ministry's academy for future diplomats. He is invited to Kremlin receptions, lectures students, publishes books, and appears in the media as an expert on U.S.-Russia relations.

But it's his bleak forecast for the U.S. that is music to the ears of the Kremlin, which in recent years has blamed Washington for everything from instability in the Middle East to the global financial crisis. Mr. Panarin's views also fit neatly with the Kremlin's narrative that Russia is returning to its rightful place on the world stage after the weakness of the 1990s, when many feared that the country would go economically and politically bankrupt and break into separate territories.

Salon Reports: Kill 'em All, Let God Sort it Out

Last month, Salon published a story reporting that U.S. Army Pfc. Albert Nelson and Pfc. Roger Suarez were killed by U.S. tank fire in Ramadi, Iraq, in late 2006, in an incident partially captured on video, but that an Army investigation instead blamed their deaths on enemy action.

Now Salon has learned that documents relating to the two men were shredded hours after the story was published. Three soldiers at Fort Carson, Colo. — including two who were present in Ramadi during the friendly fire incident, one of them just feet from where Nelson and Suarez died — were ordered to shred two boxes full of documents about Nelson and Suarez.

One of the soldiers preserved some of the documents as proof that the shredding occurred and provided them to Salon. All three soldiers, with the assistance of a U.S. senator's office, have since been relocated for their safety.

Obama's Fraudulent Selective Service Card????

By Debbie Schlussel

Did President-elect Barack Hussein Obama commit a federal crime in September of this year? Or did he never actually register and, instead, did friends of his in the Chicago federal records center, which maintains the official copy of his alleged Selective Service registration commit the crime for him?

It's either one or the other, as indicated by the release of Barack Obama's official Selective Service registration for the draft. A friend of mine, who is a retired federal agent, spent almost a year trying to obtain this document through a Freedom of Information Act request, and, after much stonewalling, finally received it and released it to me.

But the release of Obama's draft registration and an accompanying document, posted below, raises more questions than it answers. And it shows many signs of fraud, not to mention putting the lie to Obama's claim that he registered for the draft in June 1979, before it was required by law.

The Wacky Dutchman

NATO chief Jaap de Hoop Scheffer appealed Tuesday for more troops from outside the United States

American Scofflaw

One doesn't know whether to laugh, or cry at this statement.

Apparently, NATO Chief De Hoop Scheffer has managed to have selective amnesia about what was necessary to carry out a successful occupation of this country.

The US's own military protocol indicates that we needed about 500,000 soldiers on the ground to do this correctly. What we will have, even with the enhanced troop strength Obama is talking about, will be only a pitiful fraction of that.

Secondly, (and this is something De Hoop Scheffer might have read in his military history books, had he been paying attention), you cannot, absolutely cannot win what is essentially a ground war from the air.

What the massive air strikes guarantee are two things. First, you're going to kill women, kids, the elderly, and the medically fragile, along with the people you actually want to kill.

And this will simply radicalize those left standing against the Karzai government.

This is a had and stark lesson that both the US and NATO should have learned from the outcome of the Viet Nam War: it is obvious to any thinking person that they have not.

At the end of the day, there are basically two options left; carpet-bomb the place, declare victory, and go home, or negotiate with the Taliban, give them a seat at the table, declare victory, and go home.

But those are the only two options left at this point. The smarter thing would have never, ever to have gone into this country in the first place, to collectively punish people who had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11, but simply had the most viable pipeline routes.

The cost for the West was just too high when the Taliban were in power, so during that summer when all we heard was "Gary Condit, all the time, on all the TV stations, the US was quietly telling its allies that it was going to invade Afghanistan, and take the pipeline routes by force. The stage had already been set for this action earlier that year. Take a look at the date from this Australian Broadcasting Corporation article

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2001/s381088.htm

Broadcast: 02/10/2001

"The noose closes around the Taliban"

"NATO chief George Robertson has tonight announced that the US has provided proof of Osama bin Laden's involvement in last month's terrorist attacks. He says NATO members can now invoke Article Five -- the mutual defence clause, which says an attack from abroad on any ally, is an attack on them all."

"The move comes as the British PM gets ready to declare that military action in Afghanistan is now inevitable. In less than an hour Mr Blair will tell his Labour Party conference that the Taliban's time is up."

Where Them Treats?

This is Your Government Speaking

American Scofflaw
I warned you that the government was planting this nonsense in order to use it to ridicule the 9-11 investigators.

Loose Change Debunked

Loose Change is perhaps the most popular September 11 conspiracy-theory video, with its various editions reportedly logging more than 10 million web views. The most recent version, Loose Change Second Edition Recut, had more than 5 million web views as of March 2007.

Despite the video’s extraordinary popularity, its claims are so absurd that they are considered an embarrassment by other conspiracy theorists, some of whom have written lengthy critiques of the video’s most outlandish claims.

Loose Change makes very sloppy mistakes in support of its false claim that a missile, not a plane, hit the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. The video mistakes two different sections of the large hole caused by the airliner for the entire hole and, ironically, features photographs that actually disprove its “small hole” theory.