the frig blig

> > —– Original Message —–
> > From: capt.charlesdjacoby@gmail.com
> > To: undisclosed-recipients
> > Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 1:40 AM
> >
> > Hello ,
> >
> > I am hoping as well that we can work together on a better and higher
> > platform. I am a war veteran with the United Nations troop in
> > Afghanistan, on war against terrorism.. I served in the 1st Armored
> > Division in Baghdad Iraq.
> >
> > Based on the United States legislative and executive decision for
> > military action in Iraq, I am among the soldiers that have
> > criticized the U.S. policy on Iraq. Based on this, I have been court
> > martial and found innocent as I have a strong opinion towards peace
> > in Iraq. I will need this car for my purposes as I will be
> > relocating to Europe because of some security reasons and this is
> > why I contacted you so that we can put head together towards my
> > plan to invest in Europe. As a result of this,it will be important
> > for me to reveal to you that I have in my possession the sum of
> > $26.2 million USD. which I got from crude oil deal in Iraq. I have
> > been deployed to Afghanistan but I have this box in Iraq and as soon
> > as I hear from you of your reassurance to assist me then I will
> > communicate for the delivery with the help of a red cross cargo jet.
> >
> > I have this money stored somewhere very safe in our camp in Fallujah
> > Iraq waiting for a moment like this to put the money in good use and
> > now that I have been moved to Afghanistan I want the box moved
> > without delay.. I have a very profitable investment plans on hand.
> > Instead of allowing this terrorists to get the money and spend it on
> > purchasing arms from Russia, it is better channeled to saving the
> > world. I cannot move this money to the United states because I will
> > be in Europe for about 3years, so I need someone I could trust. If
> > you accept, I will transfer the money to Europe where you will be
> > the beneficiary because I am a currently settling some scores with
> > the pentagon so I cannot be parading such an amount so I need to
> > present someone as the beneficiary.. I am an American and an
> > intelligence officer for that so I have a 100% authentic means of
> > transferring the money through diplomatic courier service. I just
> > need your acceptance and all is done.
> >
> > Please if you are interested in this transaction I will give to you
> > the complete details you need for us to carry out this transaction
> > successfully. I decided to find someone that is real and not
> > imaginary and that is why I went to a secured site where I can be
> > sure that the person is real. I believe I can trust you. Right now i
> > am very careful with the way i communicate so as to reduce any kind
> > of risk until this money is finally in your custody. i shall be
> > communicating to you through email and would also give you a call
> > when it is necessary so as to inform you on any important
> > information. I want you to be brave as i have everything under
> > control. I have every proof of this fund in my possession to show
> > you that everything is authentic.
> >
> > I can brief you on further inquiry when I am in a secured place . I
> > am writing from a fresh email account so if you are not interested
> > do not reply to this email and please delete this message, if no
> > response after 3days I will then search for someone else. I am doing
> > this on trust,so i would want you to put aside any act of greed or
> > the thought of cheating as we have a lot to gain in this business
> > relationship. 26.2 million USD is a lot of money which is the dream
> > of anyone. I am in Afghanistan right now and need to secure this
> > money and send it to you if we reach a proper agreement.
> >
> > I wait for your contact details so we can go on. In less than 5 days
> > the fund should have been delivered to you and I will come over for
> > my money. I will give to you 30% of the sum and 70% is for me. I
> > hope I am been fair on this deal.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Capt. Charles David Jacoby

Today is Sunday November 15. This morning’s New York Times front page has the following “above-the-fold” articles: one about Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan (the alleged “Fort Hood killer”); one about “more than a dozen” members of the House of Representatives using the same words about health care (courtesy of lobbyist Genentech); one about President Obama visiting China; and one titled High Costs Weigh on Troop Debate for Afghan War.

The Maj. Hasan story speculates about his motives. Since he’s currently alive in the hospital, hopefully his lawyers will give him an opportunity to speak for himself eventually. However, that hasn’t stopped people from coming up with their own theories. One intriguing theory is articulated by the following quote:

“Some experts on terrorism say Major Hasan may be the latest example of an increasingly common type of terrorist, one who has been self-radicalized with the help of the Internet and who wreaks havoc without support from overseas networks and without having to cross a border to reach his target.”

In other words…his actions were a result of his own thinking. He was not following anybody’s orders but his own. Scary.

The ‘House Record … Lobbyists’ story talks about how corporate lobbyists spoon-feed sound bytes to Washington lawmakers. Shocking. By all means, let’s do something about it…oh wait…bribing lawmakers is constitutionally-protected free speech. And writing your own speeches is so last century.

The ‘Obama Visits China’ story talks about how the U.S. President is being oh-so-careful to not do or say anything that might make our Asian Overlords angry. ‘Nuf said.

The ‘Troop Debate’ story contains a very interesting estimate — “… the rough formula used by the White House…about $1 million per soldier a year…”. So it becomes trivial to calculate rough estimates of how much money our government is spending on the war in Afghanistan. I suspect our soldiers might find it interesting too, when comparing it to their salaries.

There are currently roughly 62,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan (according to the National Priorities Project). The current U.S. population is 307 million. Unemployment just topped 10 percent, which comes to 30 million people without jobs. So just by cutting our current troop level in half — not eliminating it, mind you, just cutting it in half — and giving the money saved to all of the unemployed citizens in America — we would instantly turn all 30 million unemployed into millionaires. Some of them might consider starting small businesses, which would hire other people — driving up wages since there would no longer be unemployment. I personally would consider this a good thing for the economy — maybe way better than giving TWO HUNDED TIMES this much money to bail out Wall Street. But I don’t have a degree in economics, and I consider helping out ORDINARY CITIZENS down on their luck at least as important as helping out the millionaires and billionaires who run Wall Street. So clearly I’m out of touch with federal priorities.

Which brings me to a tiny, six-sentence story on page 22 titled Gates Blocks Photographs of Prisoners. This article notes that Secretary of Defense Gates has invoked new powers, granted by Congress and signed by President Obama last month, to block the release of photographs of foreign detainees abused by American captors. This was a result of the ACLU’s having sued for release of the photographs of prisoners in Afghanistan and Iraq being abused by Americans, and federal courts having ruled in favor of the ACLU.

Well it’s just another example of America’s proud tradition of censorship and hiding the truth from that most dangerous faction, the public! We certainly don’t want to give our citizens THE TRUTH, especially the UGLY TRUTH! They might start thinking for themselves!

The U.S. is again accusing Iran of secretly building facilities to create nuclear weapons. Specifically the New York Times reports the U.S. believes that a nuclear facility announced by Iran last Thursday is “far more ominous than the Iranians were letting on.”

President Obama was joined by French Presiden Sarkozy and Prime Minister Brown of Britain in a joint denunciation of the facility yesterday. Brown added “The international community has no choice today but to draw a line in the sand.”

Well there’s always a choice, Mr. Prime Minister. And you are making your choice by making such provocative and ambiguous pronouncements.

It’s ironic that some of the same pundits and politicians who decry Iran’s nuclear power program, are doing all they can to get the U.S. to build more nuclear power plants.

The U.S. today has literally thousands of nuclear weapons ready to launch at a moment’s notice. So do Britain and France. (Other countries possessing nuclear weapons include Russia, China, India, Pakistan, North Korea, and probably Israel.)

So it’s hardly fair to single out Iran’s nuclear program as justification for further sanctions and/or outright military attacks against that country.

But then again, what country in recent memory has been upfront about their reasons for invading other countries? It’s always to take out a ‘despotic’ leader or for ‘defense’. Same old, same old.

One more time, people: Israel is a country, Judaism is a religion. Criticism of the Israeli government is not criticism of Jews or Jewishness (”anti-Semitism”).

One of the founding principles of my country, the United States, is called ’separation of church and state’. The idea is to allow citizens to freely practice (or not) the religion of their choice, separate from the affairs of government. While breaches do occur, allowing Christians Jews Buddhists and Muslims to coexist with themselves, native Americans and atheists is, I think, a good thing.

Israel illustrates some of the dangers of state-sponsored religion. As if patriotism and missionary zeal aren’t bad enough apart, combining them leads to the exact charge reported now in David Landau’s Sunday Times column, that by criticizing Israel’s invasion of Gaza, the United Nations’ report on that activity is anti-Semitic.

One more time, people: Israel is a country, Judaism is a religion.

Wondering if these days we could use a government principle of ’separation of corporation and state’. Rather too late for my country, I’m afraid. But I digress.

By granting practitioners of one religion (Judaism in this case) more legal rights than others, you explicitly create a society consisting of a privileged group and an underclass. This is a mistake made by many countries, including my own, which we are still undoing damage from.

The United States’ founders had the good sense to grant equality to different religions, but created privileged and non-privileged groups by allowing slavery. That practice flourished for a hundred years, and it took a civil war to abolish, and another hundred years to grant legal parity to non-whites in this country.

But we’re working on it in this country. Israel, founded on the principle of one religion being superior, is not and cannot. And underclasses typically feel exasperated and oppressed.

Today’s guest link is thanks to Sherri Davidoff of the Philosecurity site: What Does DHS Know About You? (Basically a complete record of every trip you take, including credit card numbers.)

News reports of Scotland’s release of Lockerbie bombing suspect Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi mentioned that the U.S. government had been pressuring Scotland not to release Megrahi, and was ‘dismayed’ at his release.

While some bombing victims’s families made public statements in support of the compassionate release.

Seems to me that certain parties in the U.S. government are scared of new evidence coming to light regarding the 1988 incident, which Megrahi’s release might facilitate.

by Maria Tomchick (reprinted from Eat The State vol 13, #24)

Assassination is banned by a US federal executive order issued by President Gerald Ford in the 1970s. That didn’t stop the Bush administration from adding assassination to its toolkit in the War on Terror, along with torture, detention without trial, and extraordinary rendition. Unfortunately, the Obama administration has not only taken up the torch, but has vastly expanded a CIA program that uses unmanned aerial drones to summarily execute suspected Taliban and Al Qaeda leaders and anyone who happens to be in the vicinity.

These are not “surgical strikes.” Aerial drones fly at very high altitudes to avoid detection. Some carry cameras to locate suspicious clusters of people, while others carry high-powered bombs to target groups of people in the hope that someone of importance is killed. A subdivision of Boeing manufactures aerial surveillance drones.

A couple of weeks ago, US officials boasted that Baitullah Mehsud, a suspected Taliban leader, had been assassinated by a missile fired from a CIA-controlled aerial done. At first, US officials told The New York Times (and the paper faithfully reported) that Mehsud, a diabetic suffering from kidney failure, was killed while receiving medical treatment on the roof of his father-in-law’s villa. No sooner had the strike been reported than conflicting information emerged.

An Associated Press article appearing in the Seattle Times on Aug. 8 said that Mehsud was killed along with his wife and several bodyguards while hooked up to an intravenous drip and undergoing treatment for “stomach problems.” The Wall Street Journal quoted Pakistani officials saying that Mehsud was “undergoing treatment for a kidney ailment.” Almost certainly he was receiving kidney dialysis at the time–not something that can occur on the roof of his father-in-law’s villa. Also, the article stated that Mehsud was killed when a missile targeted the second-story balcony of a building where he was receiving treatment. No mention was made of any rooftop.

In fact, it appears that Mehsud was killed when the CIA bombed a medical clinic–probably the only facility that offers kidney dialysis in the Waziristan frontier. We can believe with some confidence that his wife and bodyguards were not the only ones killed in the bombing, but medical personnel and other patients were included in the death toll. In addition, anyone who lives in South Waziristan who needs kidney dialysis will now die without access to the complex, sterile equipment and medical personnel required to keep them alive.

Let’s remember what’s been forgotten by US officials and the US press: the bombing of medical facilities is a war crime, a direct violation of international law and the rules of warfare. It doesn’t matter if the enemy is receiving medical treatment in the facility at the time. It doesn’t matter if the clinic is treating Hitler or Osama bin Laden, or Baitullah Mehsud, or enemy foot soldiers. Hospitals and clinics are off limits.

Nevertheless, US officials were jubilant. They happily theorized that the death of Mehsud would cause a fatal fracture among the Waziristan tribes who’ve been helping Mehsud target the Pakistani government. Scholars of Pakistan and observers on the ground in Waziristan had a different view. In the Seattle Times report, Karim Mehsud, a lawyer in Peshawar who had met Baitullah Mehsud, was quoted as saying, “Another Baitullah will emerge. This is an ideological war, this is not a local problem.” Almost everyone agrees that Baitullah Mehsud was responsible for focusing his tribe’s attention away from Afghanistan and towards the Pakistani government; now that he’s gone, his 10,000-man guerilla army is free to reunite with the Taliban and once again attack US troops in Afghanistan.

More than 360 people have been killed in over 40 drone attacks in Pakistan this year. Pakistan has publicly condemned each and every one of these attacks as a violation of Pakistani sovereignty. But both Pakistan’s foreign minister and the chief of its Interior Ministry have hailed the assassination of Mehsud as a major success. The Pakistani military has been preparing (with dread) for an offensive against tribal elements in the rugged, mountainous region of Waziristan, spurred on by heavy urging from the US government. The Pakistani government is now hopeful they can avoid the effort and expense altogether, much to the Pentagon’s dismay.

This week, US officials leaked news that the top US military commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, is considering pulling US troops back from their forward positions near the Afghanistan/Pakistan border. Since the Pakistani government won’t deploy its own troops in Waziristan, “there’s no point swinging a hammer if there’s no anvil there,” according to US officials. The recent buildup of US troops in Afghanistan has apparently had no effect, except to disperse the Taliban over a wider area and provide more targets for their attacks.

Eight years of warfare, and this is what it comes down to: our government is engaging in assassination prohibited by US law and committing international war crimes, with the excuse that it will “save American lives” and “help end the war in Afghanistan.” Nothing could be further from the truth. To accomplish those goals our military would have to pull out of Afghanistan completely, and our president would have to end the policy of assassination with the use of aerial drones and high altitude bombing. Obama has shown no willingness to order either of those things.

When you assassinate an enemy’s leader, someone will inevitably take his place. In the case of Baitullah Mehsud, who’s been ill for some time now, the preparation for his successor was probably already complete. A new leader of the Mehsud tribe will arise swiftly and without most of the infighting so ardently expected by CIA officials.

Of course, the man who replaces Baitullah Mehsud will be more radical and more bloodthirsty. And now he’ll be looking for revenge.

Sources: “Taliban leader in Pakistan reportedly dead,” Joby Warrick, Joshua Partlow, and Haq Nawaz Khan, Associated Press, reprinted in the Seattle Times, 8/8/09; “U.S. Drone Kills Chief of Taliban in Pakistan,” Matthew Rosenberg, Zahid Hussain, and Siobhan Gorman, The Wall Street Journal, 8/8/09; “U.S. studies pulling troops from remote Afghan posts,” Jonathan S. Landay and Nancy A. Youssef, Seattle Times, 8/13/09.

Retired AT&T techie Mark Klein reported details of a room in San Francisco used for warrantless monitoring of AT&T’s network in that city — and the story was killed by the Los Angeles Times (after reporting the details to the feds) and ignored by Congress. He describes this briefly in a Computerworld interview and in more detail in a self-published book Wiring Up the Big Brother Machine…And Fighting It.

Snippet from the interview:

IDGNS: What do you think you’ve accomplished by coming forward with these documents?

Klein: My main accomplishment is to let everybody know about what exactly the government is doing to people. How the government in detail is screwing over people’s privacy and trampling over the Constitution and the Fourth Amendment, and lay out in great detail how everybody’s personal lives are being delved into by the government and stored in secret databases for future reference.

And I personally wonder if Facebook is cooperating with the NSA…and if so, how much does it slow them down (the spooks, not the geeks)?

Geov Parrish reports in the June 25 issue of Eat The State that former KIRO-TV news anchor and current King County Executive candidate Susan Hutchison is not only a creationist — but she served on the Board of Directors of local “think tank” Discovery Institute. And he also reports that this information was removed from her website once she announced her candidacy.

Pass it on. This fact deserves widespread knowledge, fast.

I’m trying to understand why the U.S. finds it “unacceptable” (Secretary of State Clinton as quoted by the BBC) for North Korea to develop nuclear weapons, when the U.S. itself has literally thousands of nuclear weapons ready to launch at a moment’s notice. If it’s good enough for America, why shouldn’t the Koreans — or any other country — have the same opportunity to play with nukes? I mean, if you examine the historical record, the U.S. has invaded more countries than North Korea, and AFAIK the U.S. is the only country to have actually used nukes against another country. So arguably we’re the more dangerous country. The moral high ground Clinton sounds like she thinks she’s standing on is fairly blood-soaked.