Flyby News
"News Fit to Transmit in the Post Cassini Flyby Era"
9/11/Election Resources * Ritter-Kucinich * Sonar Limits
17 November 2002
"Those who cast the votes decide nothing; those who count the votes decide everything."
-- Joseph Stalin
1) Flyby Resources - 911 Investigations & Rigged 2002 Elections
2) Scott Ritter: "The Case Against The U.S. War on Iraq"
3) Kucinich: Leading Opposition in the House to the War
4) Navy's Sonar and Protecting Marine Life
Editor's Notes:
This issue begins with information and links on 911 investigation coverage & rigged US-2002 elections. Thanks to John Kaminski for sending this information. We need all the resources we can get to best defend and reclaim our democracy. Item 2 is a commentary and interview by Jake Asbin with Scott Ritter during his speech at Deerfield Academy, 15 October 2002. After the article are links for getting this speech on video cassette from Turning Tide Productions! This is highly recommended. Also, in item 2, you will find a link for the Reuters News Service article on medical experts in UK reporting that "A war against Iraq could escalate into a nuclear conflict that would kill nearly four million people and have catastrophic health and environmental consequences." Following this item is a press release by Congressman Dennis Kucinich, stating that the war talk by the Bush administration is undermining the UN's goals for weapons inspections, and a diplomatic peace with Iraq. Item 4 is on the latest regarding the court ruling limiting the Navy's use of low frequency active sonar systems.
Please note that time is shrinking for all of us, but particularly for Desmond Carter, who is scheduled to be executed in North Carolina on the International Day of Human Rights - 10 December 2002. Please consider supporting "Clemency for Desmond Carter" - write to Governor Easley. For more on this, including my letter to the Governor, see the "Clemency for Desmond Carter" link from http://www.flybynews.com
By trying to make a difference, we make change, at least, possible.
1) Flyby Resources - 911 Investigations & Rigged 2002 ElectionsJohn Kaminski sent Flyby News
"9/11 Investigative Reporting Links and Resources"
Posted - November 17, 2002:
http://www.flybynews.com/cgi-local/newspro/viewnews.cgi?newsid1037545133,4360, Also, in New Zealand, Al Thompson's calling the 2002 election an American coup. The following URL is a good review of polls vs. vote counts.
[You can also check the Scoop home button for other election stories.]
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0211/S00078.htmAmerican Coup: Mid-Term Election Polls vs Actuals
Tuesday, 12 November 2002, 10:25 am
Article: Alastair Thompson
In the interests of further examining the question of whether the vote in some races in the U.S. midterm elections was fixed by electronic voting machines supplied by republican affiliated companies, Scoop has done some digging. How accurate were the pollsters in advance of the US mid-term elections?
Scoop's analysis shows that - according to the polls - the Republican Party experienced a pronounced last minute swing in its favour of between 4 and 16 points. Remarkably this last minute swing appears to have been concentrated in its effects in critical Senate races (Georgia and Minnesota) where it secured it's complete control of Congress.
Scoop has compared the results of final week polling in 19 races, with the actual results in those same races.
The full details of the Scoop analysis follow below. In summary Scoop found:
- 14 races showed a post opinion poll swing towards the Republican Party (by between 3 and 16 points);
- 2 races showed a post opinion poll swing towards the Democratic Party (by 2 and 4 points);
- In three races the pollsters were close to correct;
- The largest post opinion poll vote swings occurred in Minnesota and Georgia where pollsters got the final result wrong (see… Pollsters defend their surveys in wake of upsets for more coverage of this issue);
Comments:
- All the post polling swings in favour of the democratic party were within the margin of error.
- Several of the post polling swings in favour of the republican party were well outside the margin of error.
- In the states where the senate races were critical and close the swing was predominantly towards the Republicans, with the exceptions of Arkansas and Missouri. The level of post-poll swing in these races in favour of the Republican Party in each race were: North Carolina 3, Colorado 4, Georgia 9-12, Minnesota 8-11, Texas 3-11, New Hampshire 1.
- The state where the biggest upset occurred, Georgia, is also the state that ran its election with the most electronic voting machines.
FULL DETAILS OF ANALYSIS -- See following URL Link:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0211/S00078.htm"The concept is clear, simple, and it works. Computerized voting gives the power of selection, without fear of discovery, to whomever controls the computer"
-- James & Kenneth Collier, authors of VoteScam (1992)
For "Voter Fraud 2002: Death Stalks America's Democracy"
a compilation by Warren Gammel, see:
http://www.flybynews.com/cgi-local/newspro/viewnews.cgi?newsid1037501537,48288,= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
For resources for the Mind Control Forum, see:
http://www.heart7.net/mcf/archv-hm.htm#Quinn= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
And if you aren't too burnt out, check this link with more questions on Paul Wellstone's recent tragic death
Ciresi's Law Firm Looking Into Wellstone Plane Crash
Tony Kennedy and Paul McEnroe
Star Tribune
Friday, 14 November, 2002
http://www.startribune.com/stories/1752/3430473.html
2) Scott Ritter: "The Case Against The U.S. War on Iraq"An avowed hawk resists war
By Jake Asbin
"Nonviolence is the answer to the crucial political and moral questions of our time; the need for man to overcome oppression and violence without resorting to oppression and violence. Man must evolve for all human conflict a method which rejects revenge, aggression and retaliation. The foundation of such a method is love".
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
[From his speech accepting Nobel Peace Prize - 11 December 1964]I recently had the privilege of attending a lecture and participating in a subsequent discussion with Former United Nations weapons inspector and ex-Marine, Mr. Scott Ritter. Mr. Ritter has relentlessly contributed arguments against invading Iraq and who has been dubbed "an outspoken critic" of the current administration and its rush to war. He served as the chief weapons inspector in Iraq until he was removed by the United States government. You won't find this 41-year-old son of a career Army officer following an autocratic administration as it knowingly deceives the public. Instead, he has ceaselessly presented the public an objective and persuasive argument opposing a new war undertaking in Iraq. The following are some excerpts from Mr. Ritter's lecture and conversation with me on October 16, at the Deerfield Academy, in Deerfield Massachusetts. As Mr. Ritter was about to speak, he noted that US warplanes had just attacked two Iraqi sites, while patrolling the no-fly zones that have been in effect over Iraq since 1991. Hence, reinforcing the notion that we might already be at war with Iraq.Q. How effective were your inspection teams in discovering and eliminating Saddam Hussein's Weapons of Mass Destruction?
Ritter: UNSCOM inspectors were the best investigators in the world. We were very successful in uncovering and destroying 90-95 percent of Iraq's weaponry by 1996. Fundamentally disarming Iraq as well as neutralizing their technical capabilities to manufacture and produce such weapons.
Q. In the past, the media has steadfastly reported that U.N. inspectors were kicked out of Iraq by Iraq itself-- I pointed out as an example, a recent August article in USA Today by reporter John Diamond, that repeated the common myth that "Iraq expelled U.N. weapons inspectors four years ago and accused them of being spies." For the record what really caused you and your inspectors removal from Iraq in December of 1998?
Ritter: We were not kicked out, but rather ordered out by the U.S. government. In 1997 when Richard Butler took control of inspection teams, we had basically already disarmed Iraq but our information was more valuable for over the 100 locations we inspected and gathered intel on, so that the United States would bomb them under the guise of retaliation for the inspection teams so-called forced departure. Richard Butler withdrew us in anticipation of a military attack that was aimed at regime change. I firmly believe that information we had gathered at presidential palaces and the like were used so that the military could bomb these residences with the sole intention of killing Saddam Hussein. Not destroying weapon sites or installations as was offered up by the then Clinton administration.
Q. Could those facilities that were destroyed have been rebuilt?
Ritter: No weapons inspectors have set foot in Iraq since 1998. I think Iraq was technically capable of restarting its weapons manufacturing capabilities within six months of our departure, so by early 1999 they could have had operational weapons and programs again. That gives them three and a half years to have weaponized their covertly-manufactured weapons that the Bush administration claims as motivations for an attack. The important issue here, however, is "technically capable". If we weren't watching, Iraq could do this. Just their nuclear program, would have to be started from scratch, having already been disassembled and bulldozed. Primary equipment was also inventoried, and destroyed. The Iraqi's would have to procure the complicated tools and technology required in restarting these programs. This would have been already detected, if it were true. The manufacture of chemical weapons releases a lot of gasses that would have been detected by now if they existed. We have been watching, with our satellites and other means, and have seen none of these signs. If Iraq was producing weapons right now, we [the U.S. government] would have definitive proof, but we don't .
Q. What do you think of this administration's comments regarding the Al Qaeda connection and Iraqi support of terrorism?
Ritter: This is absurd, really. Iraq is run by a secular dictator. Saddam has spent his entire reign waging war on Islamic fundamentalism, and has proceeded to crush any uprising. Osama Bin Laden has shown a history of hating Saddam Hussein. He's called him an apostate, somebody who needs to be killed.
Q. Even as Bin Laden claims sanctions against Iraq as a war cry?
Ritter: Because sanctions don't target Saddam, they target Iraqi civilians.
Q. My last question because of time constraints: I ask you this question as a concerned veteran, Bush has gone on record, (the first sitting president to do so) as stating: "He would not hesitate to use pre-emptive, first-strike tactical nuclear weapons, bunker-busters, to remove threats to U.S. interests." Do you believe Bush will resort to using nuclear weapons as a means to removing Saddam Hussein from power?
Ritter: Here's the scenario, if Bush ignores the United Nations and unilaterally invades, he has at his disposal of no more than 80,000-100,000 troops he can deploy immediately. If it where to take urban warfare-- fighting street to street, house to house, hand to hand combat-- to liberate Baghdad, and we have our armed forces bogged down, then yes Bush would have the indisputable means of ending the quagmire at his disposal. And yes I do believe President Bush would deliver a nuclear warhead to change the regime in Iraq. Some of his closest advisors are advocating exactly this scenario.
end....................................................
In closing, Mr. Ritter's interview and comments come at a pivotal time for our nation. I write this commentary during a sad milieu, one man of distinguished valor whom I personally met, Senator Paul Wellstone of Minnesota (he was one of twenty-three others who bravely voted against Bush's war resolution), has died in a plane crash. The president of the United States proceeds to ignore the voices and concerns so many citizens have against his charge to war. While poutingly thumbing his nose at world leaders who are resisting his unilateral war and instead are advocating the re-deployment of U.N. weapons inspectors to Iraq.
So by the span of making it to the age of forty, I have witnessed during the last year alone, the prominent symbols of identity in my old hometown murdered before they ever had a chance to live, the retailing of war and perpetuation of immanent aggression, so much so, that our Congress willingly gave even more power to this administration. I have endured lies by elected officials who have lamely explained bipartisanship agreements as being more important during these distressing times, instead of debating the minutiae this action holds for family members of American soldiers and our nation's security. Also, I have watched with alarming frequency former White House officials and former presidents champion restraint.
By far, the worst "Homeland" experience has been the suspension of civil liberties, including Right's of the nation's press. So shortly after 9-11, before the country could thoroughly mourn its pain, Mr. Bush, Mr. Ashcroft and their intelligence circles did not hesitate to subvert our Constitution and Bill of Rights, under the guise of fighting lifetime-lasting terrorism, by signing into law the (342 page) USA PATRIOT Act on October 26, 2001.
The Act passed with no transparency and virtually no public hearings or debate, and it was accompanied by neither a conference nor a committee report. This administration's obvious power grab, coupled with the wide array of anti-terrorism tools that the Act puts at its disposal, portends a broad suspension of civil liberties that will reach far beyond those who are involved in terrorist activities.
First, the Act places our First Amendment Rights to freedom of speech and political association at peril by fabricating a broad new crime of "Domestic Terrorism,"(which is vaguely defined in Section 802 of the Act). Because this new crime is couched in such vague terms, it may be interpreted by law enforcement agencies as endorsing the investigation and surveillance of political activists and organizations based on their opposition to government policies. It could also be read by prosecutors as permitting the criminalization of legitimate political dissent. Environmental activists and anti-globalization activists and any group who uses direct action--no matter how peacefully and non-violent--are particularly vulnerable to severe prosecution as "domestic terrorists." The First Amendment does not tolerate viewpoint-based discrimination.
Second, the Act will reduce our already modest expectations of privacy under the Fourth Amendment by granting the government enhanced surveillance powers. Using the Act, the Federal Bureau of Investigation can (and will) covertly enter our homes and apartments to conduct "sneak and peak searches" without ever notifying the person of the execution of the search warrant until after the search has been completed. In Section 213 of the Act, it allows authorized delay of notice of the execution of a warrant to conduct a seizure of items where the court finds a "reasonable necessity" for the seizure-Translation- They can rifle through someones personal effects stealing any information, using it against an individual in the future while nobody was ever notified.
Lastly, under this dreadful Act non-citizens will see a further erosion of their due process rights as they are placed in mandatory detention and removed from the United States. How sad then that our crucial political activists and respected writers who are faultfinding on our government or persons who maintain ties with international civil and human rights groups or environmental protecting movements, will most likely bear the brunt of these attacks on our civil liberties.
Respectfully,
Jake Asbin
(long time anti-war activist and American Indian activist who currently resides in Northampton, Massachusetts)
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Please Note:
SCOTT RITTER'S SPEECH AT DEERFIELD ACADEMY IS NOW AVAILABLE BY VIDEO CASSETTE by TURNING TIDE PRODUCTIONS:
SCOTT RITTER: "The Case Against The U.S. War on Iraq" Turning Tide Productions • PO Box 864 · Wendell, MA 01379 · USA
Tel: 800-557-6414 · 978-544-8313 · Fax: 978-544-7989 Email: info@turningtide.com
Talk by former U.N. weapons inspector in Iraq and former U.S. Marine given at Deerfield Academy, Deerfield, MA on October 15. Broadcast nationally on Pacifica Radio's "Democracy Now" and on Free Speech TV. (55 minutes, VHS Video) Special Price (all categories): $29.95, plus $6 shipping & handling. To place your order now, call 1-800-557-6414. More details about this video, as well as, our new series of anti-war organizing videos, will be posted soon at Turning Tide Production's Web Site:
http://www.turningtide.comFlyby News highly recommends getting and showing SCOTT RITTER: "The Case Against The U.S. War on Iraq" - which will be featured at our next sponsored video/discussion event on the topic of "U.S. Democracy and Safeguarding Our Planet" -- at the Jones Library in Amherst, MA -- Tuesday 14 January 2003 (6-9pm).
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
For more information on Scott Ritter, campaigns, and related resources, you can also visit:
Traprock Peace Center –
http://www.traprockpeace.orgAlso, FlybyNews.com's "Mid East Peace" initiatives and resource page:
http://www.flybynews.com/cgi-local/newspro/viewnews.cgi?newsid1019753212,83873,This Archive issue contains an article on the talk 10/15/02 talk by Scott Ritter at the Deerfield Academy in the first Item:
Scott Ritter -- "NO TO WAR" * Kucinich Asks White House To Explain Contradictions On Iraq, North Korea Nukes * Bush - Iraq War - and Armageddon
3) Kucinich: Leading Opposition in the House to the WarFor Immediate Release
Contact: Doug Gordon
(202)225-5871 (w)
(202)271-7302 (c)
November 11, 2002
War Talk By Administration Undermines UN Inspections in Iraq
Despite securing a United Nations' resolution to ensure weapons inspectors return to Iraq, the Administration has continued its war talk, undermining the stated goals of the United Nations, Congressman Dennis J. Kucinich (D-OH) stated today.
Today, Kucinich, who leads opposition in the House to the war, issued the following statement:
"The Administration's continual war talk is contrary to the spirit of the resolution the UN passed, and is contrary to the assurances which the Administration gave to secure the key votes of Russia, France and Syria in the Security Council. The UN is attempting to bring about a peaceful resolution to the crisis. The Administration's war talk undermines this goal.
"It must be understood, the UN did not pass an authorization for the use of force against Iraq. The UN resolution authorized the return of weapons inspectors and required the Iraqi government to comply. Non-compliance is to be referred back to the Security Council by UN weapons inspectors.
"Despite that, immediately after the UN vote, the Administration continued to indulge in talk. Worse, over the weekend, the Administration leaked to the press its latest war plan to send 250,000 American men and women into battle against Iraq. This even before the Iraqi government had a chance to respond to the UN resolution.
"Even today, while the UN is attempting to gain approval for inspections from the Iraqi government, the Administration is continuing its call for regime change. Currently, the Administration is engaging in a massive build up of troops, aircraft, and materiel in preparation for war. These actions make it clear the Administration is on a war mission not a mission to return UN weapons inspectors to Iraq.
"In order to bring peace and stability to the region, the United States must continue to work with the international community, not undermine the goals of the UN."
http://www.house.gov/kucinich/press/pr-021111-wartalk.htmFor the FlybyNews.com updated page - Dennis J. Kucinich for President in 2004 - see:
http://www.flybynews.com/cgi-local/newspro/viewnews.cgi?newsid1021307488,43210,m
4) Navy's Sonar and Protecting Marine LifeDate: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 00:32:40 -0800
From: Cheryl Magill
Subject: Database update & NY Post Perceptions
This is a message to the Stop LFAS Worldwide Network: The current information being compiled in the database has to do with unique strandings and only with strandings. Political, scientific, legal and activist issues are not included in this inventory by stated reference. So far we have 51 strandings identified under quick reference in this database. More complete explanations as to why those incidents are associated with suspected or known acoustic influences is referenced or linked with each entry. Ultimately, I'd like to see a more detailed description available at a glance. Some of the strandings involve as many as 500 or more animals. And I didn't check very carefully for any supplemental information between 1998-2000. So there are no doubt more entries to be pulled from our archives.
Putting a list like this together has been a sobering experience. It's a sad task to undertake. I kept finding reminders that only a portion of the injured whale population actually makes it's way to shore. Sadder too, is the fact that we know the strandings are simply headline grabbers. The real damage being done in the water is likely less dramatic and more insidious. As is stated in one entry, "Between 20 percent and 35 percent of whales found dead show signs of having been struck by ships." The increasing apparent deafness of whales and other marine life is hardly grabbing headlines. But it is an alarming increase..
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Dear LFA Activists:
Yesterday (Thursday 11-14-2002), Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and the Navy reached a tentative agreement (still has to be approved by Judge LaPorte) on where LFA Sonar can be tested and trained with before the full trial in June. Essentially, the Navy went along with the NRDC approach of limiting activity to an area in the Pacific Ocean far from coastal areas and major biologically important areas.
The agreement frees up the lawyers and scientists to concentrate on the trial set for June on the merits of the case. In the meantime, LFA Sonar use will still be allowed, but in a very limited area.
Congrats to the lawyers at NRDC!
Mark J. Palmer
For more information on this issue, visit the updated flybynews.com link: "The harmful impact on Whales and Dolphins by the U.S. Navy's experimental use of active sonar systems."
http://www.flybynews.com/cgi-local/newspro/viewnews.cgi?newsid948385848,37113,
A "Fair Use Policy" that describes Flyby News' use of copyrighted material is posted at flybynews.com.
Your feedback, networking Flyby News, and forwarding us articles of interest, are welcomed and appreciated. You can write to the publisher/editor Jonathan Mark info@flybynews.com
FLYBY NEWS
=====Fit to Transmit in the Post Cassini Flyby Era====>
= = = = = = www.flybynews.com = = = = =