Mass demonstration planned outside Israel’s Ofer prison holding 11,000 Palestinian political prisoners

August 31 2009

Bethlehem

A mass demonstration will be held outside Ofer prison in the West Bank on Monday, according to a statement.

An organization of Palestinians, Israelis and international solidarity activists said it would gather in front of Ofer prison to protest against Israeli arrest and intimidation campaigns.

Israeli forces have conducted arrest and intimidation campaigns on villages that resist Israeli “apartheid infrastructure,” the campaign said.

Israeli forces have arrested 176 Palestinians from five villages alone over their resistance to construction of the wall, human rights organization Addameer and Stop the Wall said. An estimated 11,000 Palestinian political prisoners are currently being held in Israeli jails.

The northern West Bank jail houses only Palestinian detainees.

Treatment of Children

Source

The family of Na’el Barghouthi will be in attendance to demand for his release. Barghouthi was taken by Israeli forces on 4 April 1978 and has been behind bars for 31 years.

The number of Palestinians arrested since the beginning of the second Intifada in September 2000 is over 40,000, including detainees in interrogation centers and detention centers.


The Infinite Violation of Human Rights in Israeli prisons

Israel declares the shooting of American activist, Tristan Anderson to be an “act of war”

Indexed List of all Stories in Archives

Israeli navy fires on Gaza fisherman/UN report on Gaza Crisis

The Israeli navy opened fire on fishermen from the besieged Gaza Strip on Monday, causing one boat to burst into flames, the army said. Witnesses did not report any casualties.

The boat was targeted off Beit Lahia in northern Gaza by the Israeli navy which enforces a blockade on the Palestinian territory and prevents fishermen from venturing more than five kilometres (3.5 miles) from shore.

A military spokeswoman confirmed the navy opened fire at fishing boats after their crews ignored warning shots and orders to turn back. She said the Israeli navy helped put out the fire on the fishing boat.

About 3,500 fishermen struggle to ply their trade off Gaza’s 40-kilometre (25-mile) Mediterranean coastline in spite of the Israeli blockade.

Source

The Thursady before the above incident

Israeli navy kills Palestinian fisherman

GAZA CITY — A Gaza fisherman was killed on Thursday by a shell fired by Israel’s navy, Palestinian medics said.

Mohammed Attar, 25, was hit by shrapnel, according to Muawiha Hassanein, who heads the territory’s emergency medical services. He had apparently been in his boat just off northern Gaza’s shore when he was hit.

There was no immediate comment from the Israeli military.

Navy vessels enforcing Israel’s blockade of the Palestinian territory regularly fire at Palestinian fishermen to prevent them from venturing more than a few kilometers (miles) from shore.

Source

Medics say Israeli forces killed Gaza fisherman

Gaza – Ma’an – A Palestinian man was killed and another injured on Thursday when Israel’s navy shelled a fishing boat just off the coast of the northern Gaza Strip, medical officials told Ma’an.

However an Israeli military spokesman denied the navy had anything to do with the incident. He said naval forces did not fire on the boat, nor otherwise cause the death of a man onboard.

But earlier Thursday Dr Mu’awiyah Hassanein, the director of emergency and ambulance services at Gaza’s Health Ministry, said Israeli shells killed 25-year-old Muhammad Nady Al-Attar when his head was severed from his body.

One other fisherman was injured in the incident, which reportedly occurred while the two were fishing.

Al-Attar was buried later on Thursday after a funeral procession in his home town of Beit Lahiya.

Source

OCHA: “Gaza on the verge of humanitarian crisis”

August 26, 2009
by Saed Bannoura

A report published by the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) revealed
that the Gaza Strip is on the verge of a devastating humanitarian crisis due to the ongoing Israeli siege on the coastal region si.nce more than three years
The UN stated that some 120.000 employees have lost their jobs, while %75 of the residents does not even have sufficient access food, proper education and health services.

The report added that the ongoing Israeli siege has created further crises in Gaza, and increasing the suffering of the residents as they do not have access to basic services.

It also said that as Israel hold foods supplies on the borders for extended periods under security claims, most of the food eventually expires and becomes unfit for human consumption.

Israel is holding some 17000 containers filled with foodstuffs and supplies. The goods stored in the containers are worth $10.000.000.

Source

Israel’s former prime minister, Ehud Olmert, has been indicted on three counts of corruption

Indexed List of all Stories in Archives

Israel’s former prime minister, Ehud Olmert, has been indicted on three counts of corruption

August 30 2009

Former Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert was indicted on three counts of corruption on Sunday, becoming the first ex-premier to face criminal charges, the attorney general’s office said.

“The attorney general… has decided to press charges against former prime minister Ehud Olmert,” the office of Attorney General Menahem Mazuz said in a statement. “The charge sheet was presented today in Jerusalem district court.”

The 61-page charge sheet accuses Olmert of “fraud, breach of trust, registering false corporate documents, and concealing fraudulent earnings,” related to three of the scandals that dogged him when he was in office.

Olmert’s personal secretary Shula Zaken was also indicted on several counts, the statement said.

A spokesman at Mazuz’s office said that the 63-year-old Olmert becomes the first former or current prime minister in Israeli history to face criminal charges.

Olmert has always insisted he is innocent and his spokesman said on Sunday the trial would vindicate him.

“After having deposed an acting prime minister, it is obvious that the attorney general and the state prosecutor have no other choice than to indict Olmert,” said Amir Dan, the spokesman.

“The court of justice on the other hand is clean of such foreign considerations. Therefore Olmert is convinced that in court he will be able to prove his innocence once and for all.”

Olmert resigned in September over the corruption allegations but remained in office as caretaker until late March, when the hawkish Likud party head Benjamin Netanyahu was sworn in following February 10 elections.

Olmert was indicted for allegedly unlawfully accepting gifts — including cash-stuffed envelopes — from the Jewish-American businessman Morris Talansky, and for multiple-billing foreign trips in the so-called Rishon Tours affair.

He has also been charged with cronyism in relation to an investment centre he oversaw when he was minister of trade and industry between 2003 and 2006.

All the charges concern alleged actions taken before Olmert became prime minister, when he served as mayor of Jerusalem from 1993 to 2003 and then as minister of trade and industry from 2003 to 2006.

Mazuz had previously dropped three other corruption investigations against Olmert, whom Time Magazine named Israel’s most able politician when he formally assumed office in May 2006.

The various investigations, involving repeated police interrogations, weighed heavily on Olmert’s final months in office, prompting a wave of calls for him to step down.

The indictment comes amid a string of scandals that have hit Israeli public officials in recent years, with three former ministers handed prison sentences and both of Israel’s most recent former presidents resigning in disgrace.

Police earlier this month recommended that Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman be indicted on charges of bribery, money laundering and obstruction of justice, while former president Moshe Katsav is on trial on several counts of rape, sexual harassment and indecent acts.

Olmert had formally assumed office in May 2006 after several months of serving as acting prime minister when his predecessor and political mentor Ariel Sharon suffered a stroke and fell into a coma at the start of that year.

Under his stewardship, Israel became embroiled in a war against Lebanon’s Hezbollah militia in July-August 2006, a conflict for which he was widely criticised, with his popularity ratings at one point plunging into the single digits.

But he redeemed his image to a certain extent when he presided over Israel’s three-week assault on the Islamist Hamas movement in the Gaza Strip at the turn of the year, which was widely seen as a success among Israelis.

Olmert relaunched peace talks with Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas at an international conference held in the United States in November 2007 after a nearly seven-year hiatus, but the negotiations made little progress and were suspended during the Gaza war.

Source

They are all so innocent. Any time anyone says anything negative about  Israel they scream anti semitism,  they rant on about the holocaust or they attempt to boycott the source of the information.

So when will there be  “war crime” charges?

Israel wants boycotts for everything, but no one dare boycott them

Israel declares the shooting of American activist, Tristan Anderson to be an “act of war”

Testimony from Israeli soldiers/ Gaza

Israel targets Sweden over newspaper claim

Butchers: The hidden truth about Israel’s kidney theft ring

Swedish PM: No apology to Israel in regards to article Swedish newspaper reveals Israeli army murders Palestinians for their organs

U.S. group invests tax-free millions in East Jerusalem land

Gaza cancer patients have only painkillers, due to Israeli Blockade

Swedish newspaper reveals Israeli army murders Palestinians for their organs

Indexed List of all Stories in Archives

Bush shoe thrower Muntadhar al-Zaidi to be freed

August 30 2009

Al-Zaindi Muntadhar al-Zaidi (AFP)

An Iraqi journalist jailed after hurling his shoes at George Bush, the former US president, will be released in September.

Muntadhar al-Zaidi’s sentence was reduced for good behaviour, his lawyer said on Saturday.

Karim al-Shujairi, a defence attorney, said al-Zeidi will now be released on September 14, three months early.

Al-Zaidi was initially sentenced to three years after pleading not guilty to assaulting a foreign leader, then the court reduced it to one year because the journalist had no prior criminal history.

The act of the 30-year-old reporter during Bush’s last visit to Iraq as president turned him into a folk hero across the Arab world amid anger over the 2003 invasion.

The incident, which took place on December 14, embarrassed Nouri al-Maliki, the Iraqi prime minister, who was standing next to Bush at the time during a joint news conference.

Neither leader was injured, but Bush was forced to duck for cover as the journalist shouted in Arabic: “This is your farewell kiss, you dog! This is from the widows, the orphans and those who were killed in Iraq.”

Source

Added September 12 2009

Iraqi shoe thrower Muntadhar al-Zeidi to be released from jail

Published in: on August 31, 2009 at 1:13 am  Comments Off  
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Israel wants boycotts for everything, but no one dare boycott them

The Last Refuge
August 27 2009

The timing of the mini-maelstrom over an opinion piece in the Los Angeles Times by Neve Gordon, who teaches politics and government at Be’er Sheva’s Ben-Gurion University, calling for a boycott of Israel, was somewhat grotesque. Hardly have the throats dried of those calling for his dismissal, for his citizenship to be revoked, for his expulsion and, if all else fails, his stoning, when another petition has surfaced on the Internet, this one calling for a boycott of Ikea. A bad article on the back page of a Swedish tabloid is enough to produce a call here for a consumer boycott to which thousands sign their names. Turkey has barely recovered from the boycott that our package tourers imposed on it because its prime minister had the gall to attack our president, and already we are cruising toward our next boycott target. It’s our right.
It’s a safe bet that most of the boycotters of Antalya and Ikea are the same people who want to tar-and-feather the Israeli professor who dared promulgate the use of the very same civic weapon. According to the Israelis who railed against Gordon, the imposition of a boycott is a legitimate, perhaps even effective, means of punishment that can be invoked against our enemies, real or imagined. Gordon, an Israeli patriot who served in the Paratroops and is raising his two children here, thinks that a 42-year-long criminal occupation should generate at least as much international protest as an article in a Swedish newspaper, and that this protest can and should be translated into concrete measures. The Israelis think that one scurrilous article is enough to warrant punishing everything Swedish, and that one comment by a prime minister is enough to do the same to everything Turkish. Gordon thinks the occupation is a sufficiently important motive to boycott everything Israeli.

Since the time of the ban imposed in the Jewish community by Rabbeinu Gershom at the turn of the first millennium, which applies to offenses of considerably less severity than mistreating 3.5 million people – namely, marrying more than one woman, divorcing a woman without her consent and reading private correspondence without the owner’s consent – the boycott has been a just and appropriate civil weapon. And since the boycott of the apartheid regime in South Africa, the boycott has also been an effective weapon. Israel is demanding its invocation against Iran, America wants it imposed against North Korea and both of them are demanding it against the Hamas government in the Gaza Strip, and worse, against all the residents of Gaza. Israel, and with it most of the international community, imposed a boycott on 1.5 million Gazans only because they did not vote for the right party in the democratic elections that the international community demanded.

A country that constantly demands boycott from the world and also imposes boycotts itself, cannot play the victim when the same weapon is turned against it. If the election of Hamas is cause for boycott, then occupation is a far more potent cause. The fact that Israel is living a lie – pretending that the occupation does not exist, that it is just, temporary and unavoidable – does not make the struggle against it any less legitimate. So let us admit the truth: The occupier deserves to be boycotted. As long as the Israelis pay no price for the occupation, the occupation will not end, and therefore the only way open to the opponents of the occupation is to take concrete means that will make the Israelis understand that the injustice they are perpetrating comes with a price tag.

Anyone who champions the struggle against the occupation is no less of a patriot than a soldier who shoots a bound Palestinian or a settler who plunders land and builds his house on it, in defiance of every law. They are giving Israel a far worse name than a lecturer who calls for a struggle against the occupation – just ask Israel’s critics. It is precisely the Gordons, those who fight from within, who are repairing slightly the horrific damage that has been done to Israel’s image in the past few years. They are proving to the world that despite everything Israel is not monolithic, that not all Israelis speak with the same voice, that not all Israelis are Liebermans or Kahanists, and that maybe Israel is, after all, a type of democracy with freedom of expression, at least for its Jewish citizens.

Gordon went one step further. Boycott is the next logical step, he believes, because all else has failed. Forty-two years of fruitless fighting from within and an occupation that is only growing stronger, dictate stepping up the struggle. We tried demonstrations but the masses did not come; we tried conferences but they led nowhere. All that’s left is to give in, to go on with the routine of our lives, like all the Israelis, to shut our eyes and hope for the best – or to intensify the struggle, in conjunction with the intensification of the occupation. The Israeli soldiers who shoot at civilian demonstrators in Bil’in or Na’alin, almost like in Iran, are perpetrating a far more illegitimate act against the state’s rule of law than those calling for an international boycott. But no one will urge the revocation of their citizenship.

Gordon chose not to follow the herd, unlike most of his cowardly colleagues or the nationalists. It is one’s right to think that an Israeli who does not boycott Israel does not have the right to call on others to take that step, or that the call for an external boycott is the last option of Israeli patriots who do not want to abandon the country or throw up their hands. There is, however, no place for the vicious attacks on Gordon. The height of ludicrousness was achieved by the President of Ben-Gurion University, Prof. Rivka Carmi. She was appalled by the article published by a member of her faculty, fearing it could affect the university’s donations from American Jews. Here, then, is a new criterion for good citizenship and morality: the harm it wreaks to our schnorring. It’s also a new gauge for academic and civic freedom of expression: If something miffs the donors from Beverly Hills or Miami Beach, then we must not speak it aloud. Quiet – people donating.

The reactions from official Israel, and from the street, have lately become more irritable and more aggressive. An article in a Swedish paper or in an American paper, a report by Breaking the Silence or Human Rights Watch, whatever does not conform to the official right-wing, militaristic, nationalist line, is reviled, delegitimized and subjected to an outpouring of hate. This is an encouraging sign. Only when Israel, at both the official and the popular level, begins to understand that something went awry here, that something is morally rotten, that maybe protest, documentation and exposure are justified, then what remains is the last weapon in the hands of the defenders, the weapon of unrestrained attack on the protesters and the documenters.

If Israel were sure it is right, it would not be so frightened and be so aggressive against everyone who objects to its official line. If we were convinced that the soldiers of Breaking the Silence are making up stories and that Gordon’s call for a boycott and his description of Israel as an apartheid state are unjust, we would not be so abusive toward them. Not only Religious Services Minister Yaakov Margi, from Shas, but also Education Minister Gideon Sa’ar, who expressed “disgust,” and Science and Technology Minister Daniel Hershkowitz, who called for Gordon’s dismissal – two ministers who are supposed to be in charge of imparting education and values – were in the forefront of the assault against Gordon. It is not just a question of basic intolerance for different and even subversive opinions, whose expression is a fundamental value in every democracy. It is also a manifestation of edginess and aggressiveness that prove what Gordon and others like him want so much to show in Israel and abroad: that something very basic and very deep is flawed in the third kingdom of Israel.

Source

Point of interest. IKEA is owned by a non profit group from the Netherlands. ( Dutch).

Antalya, Mediterranean paradise, Turkish riviera. Very Beautiful place.

Turkey’s Fallout With Israel Deals Blow to Settlers

Ottoman archives show land deeds of settlers were  forged.

March 26 2009

A legal battle being waged by Palestinian families to stop the takeover of their neighborhood in East Jerusalem by Jewish settlers has received a major fillip from the recent souring of relations between Israel and Turkey.

After the Israeli army’s assault on the Gaza Strip in January, lawyers for the families were given access to Ottoman land registry archives in Ankara for the first time, providing what they say is proof that title deeds produced by the settlers are forged.

On Monday, Palestinian lawyers presented the Ottoman documents to an Israeli court, which is expected to assess their validity over the next few weeks. The lawyers hope that proceedings to evict about 500 residents from Sheikh Jarrah will be halted.

The families’ unprecedented access to the Turkish archives may mark a watershed, paving the way for successful appeals by other Palestinians in East Jerusalem and the West Bank caught in legal disputes with settlers and the Israeli government over land ownership.

Interest in the plight of Sheikh Jarrah’s residents peaked in November when one couple, Fawziya and Mohammed Khurd, were evicted from their home by an Israeli judge. Mr Khurd, who was chronically ill, died days later.

Meanwhile, Mrs Khurd, 63, has staged a protest by living in a tent on waste ground close to her former home. Israeli police have torn down the tent six times and she is facing a series of fines from the Jerusalem municipality.

The problems facing Mrs Khurd and the other residents derive from legal claims by the Sephardi Jewry Association that it purchased Sheikh Jarrah’s land in the 19th century. Settler groups hope to evict all the residents, demolish their homes and build 200 apartments in their place.

The location is considered strategic by settler organizations because it is close to the Old City and its Muslim holy places.

Unusually, foreign diplomats, including from the United States, have protested, saying eviction of the Palestinian families would undermine the basis of a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The help of the Turkish government has been crucial, however, because Palestine was part of the Ottoman Empire when the land transactions supposedly took place.

Israel and Turkey have been close military and political allies for decades and traditionally Ankara has avoided straining ties by becoming involved in land disputes in the occupied territories. But there appears to have been an about-turn in Turkish government policy since a diplomatic falling-out between the two countries over Israel’s recent Gaza operation.

Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey’s prime minister, accused his Israeli counterpart, Ehud Olmert, of “lying” and “back-stabbing”, reportedly furious that Israel launched its military operation without warning him. At the time of the attack, Turkey was mediating peace negotiations between Israel and Syria.

Days after the fighting ended in Gaza, Mr Erdogan stormed out of a meeting of the World Economic Forum in Switzerland, having accused Shimon Peres, the Israeli president, of “knowing very well how to kill.”

According to lawyers acting for the Sheikh Jarrah families, the crisis in relations has translated into a greater openness from Ankara in helping them in their legal battle.

“We have noticed a dramatic change in the atmosphere now when we approach Turkish officials,” said Hatem Abu Ahmad, one of Mrs Khurd’s lawyers. “Before they did not dare upset Israel and put us off with excuses about why they could not help.”

He said the families’ lawyers were finally invited to the archives in Ankara in January, after they submitted requests over several months to the Turkish consulate in Jerusalem and the Turkish Embassy in Tel Aviv.

Officials in Turkey traced the documents the lawyers requested and provided affidavits that the settlers’ land claims were forged. The search of the Ottoman archives, Mr Abu Ahmad said, had failed to locate any title deeds belonging to a Jewish group for the land in Sheikh Jarrah.

“Turkish officials have also told us that in future they will assist us whenever we need help and that they are ready to trace similar documents relating to other cases,” Mr Abu Ahmad said. “They even asked us if there were other documents we were looking for.”

That could prove significant as the Jerusalem municipality threatens a new campaign of house demolitions against Palestinians. Last week, Nabil Abu Rudeina, a spokesman for Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, called the recent issuing of dozens of demolition orders in Jerusalem “ethnic cleansing.”

Palestinian legal groups regularly argue that settlers forge documents in a bid to grab land from private Palestinian owners, but have great difficulty proving their case.

Late last year the Associated Press news agency exposed a scam by settlers regarding land on which they have built the Migron outpost, near Ramallah, home to more than 40 Jewish families. The settlers’ documents were supposedly signed by the Palestinian owner, Abdel Latif Sumarin, in California in 2004, even though he died in 1961.

The families in Sheikh Jarrah ended up living in their current homes after they were forced to flee from territory that became Israel during the 1948 war. Jordan, which controlled East Jerusalem until Israel’s occupation in 1967, and the United Nations gave the refugees plots on which to build homes.

Mrs Khurd said she would stay in her tent until she received justice.

“My family is originally from Talbiyeh,” she said, referring to what has become today one of the wealthiest districts of West Jerusalem. “I am not allowed to go back to the property that is rightfully mine, but these settlers are given my home, which never belonged to them.

Israel declares the shooting of American activist, Tristan Anderson to be an “act of war”

Testimony from Israeli soldiers/ Gaza

Israel targets Sweden over newspaper claim

Butchers: The hidden truth about Israel’s kidney theft ring

Swedish PM: No apology to Israel in regards to article Swedish newspaper reveals Israeli army murders Palestinians for their organs

U.S. group invests tax-free millions in East Jerusalem land

Gaza cancer patients have only painkillers, due to Israeli Blockade

Swedish newspaper reveals Israeli army murders Palestinians for their organs

Indexed List of all Stories in Archives

Published in: on August 30, 2009 at 9:38 am  Comments Off  
Tags: , , ,

CIA Releases Its Instructions For Breaking a Detainee’s Will

CIA Releases Its Instructions For Breaking a Detainee’s Will

These methods are barbaric. Imagine yourself being treated in this manner. Be sure to read “guidelines for interrogating high-value detainees” it’s rather long but everyone should know. A few thing have been blacked out.

By Joby Warrick, Peter Finn and Julie Tate

August 26, 2009

As the session begins, the detainee stands naked, except for a hood covering his head. Guards shackle his arms and legs, then slip a small collar around his neck. The collar will be used later; according to CIA guidelines for interrogations, it will serve as a handle for slamming the detainee’s head against a wall.
After removing the hood, the interrogator opens with a slap across the face — to get the detainee’s attention — followed by other slaps, the guidelines state. Next comes the head-slamming, or “walling,” which can be tried once “to make a point,” or repeated again and again.

“Twenty or thirty times consecutively” is permissible, the guidelines say, “if the interrogator requires a more significant response to a question.” And if that fails, there are far harsher techniques to be tried.

Five years after the CIA’s secret detention program came to light, much is known about the spy agency’s decision to use harsh techniques, including waterboarding, to pry information from alleged al-Qaeda leaders. Now, with the release late Monday of guidelines for interrogating high-value detainees, the agency has provided — in its own words — the first detailed description of the step-by-step procedures used to systematically crush a detainee’s will to resist by eliciting stress, exhaustion and fear.
The guidelines, along with thousands of pages from other newly released documents, also show how the CIA gradually imposed limits on the program and eliminated some of the most controversial practices after the agency’s medical advisers protested.
Still, by Dec. 30, 2004, the date of the CIA memo that outlines the guidelines to the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, agency interrogators had grown adept at using sleep deprivation, stress positions and sometimes multiple methods to create a “state of learned helplessness and dependence.”

Certain interrogation techniques place the detainee in more physical and psychological stress and, therefore, are considered more effective tools,” according to the memo, released under a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by Amnesty International USA and the American Civil Liberties Union.

The CIA on Tuesday declined to comment on the memo, which was written by an agency lawyer whose name was redacted from the document. But agency spokesman George Little noted that the interrogation program operated under guidelines approved by top legal officials of the Bush administration’s Justice Department.
“This program, which always constituted a fraction of the CIA’s counterterrorism efforts, is over,” Little said. “The agency is, as always, focused on protecting the nation today and into the future.”

CIA officials also have noted that harsh techniques were reserved for a small group of top-level terrorism suspects believed to be knowledgeable about the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Agency officials believe the methods prevented future attacks.
Medical Concerns

As outlined in the memo, the agency’s psychological assault on a detainee would begin immediately after his arrest. With blindfolds and earmuffs, he would be “deprived of sight and sound” during the flight to the CIA’s secret prison. He would have no human interaction, except during a medical checkup.

In the initial days of detention, an assessment interview would determine whether the captive would cooperate willingly by providing “information on actionable threats.” If no such leads were volunteered, a coercive phase would begin.

The detainee would be ushered into a world of constant bright light and high-volume “white noise” at levels up to 79 decibels, about the same volume as a passing freight train. He would be shorn, shaved, stripped of his clothes, fed a mostly liquid diet and forced to stay awake for up to 180 hours.

“Establishing this baseline state is important to demonstrate to the [detainee] that he has no control,” the memo states.
Interrogations at CIA prisons occurred in special cells outfitted on one side with a plywood wall, to prevent severe head injuries. According to the agency’s interrogation plan, the nude, hooded detainee would be placed against the wall and shackled. Then the questioning would begin.

“The interrogators remove the [detainee's] hood and explain the situation to him, tell him that the interrogators will do what it takes to get important information,” the document states.

If there was no response, the interrogator would use an “insult slap” to immediately “correct the detainee or provide a consequence to a detainee’s response.” If there was still no response, the interrogator could use an “abdominal slap” or grab the captive by his face, the memo states.

Each failure would be met with increasingly harsher tactics. After slamming a detainee’s head against the plywood barrier multiple times, the interrogator could douse him with water; deprive him of toilet facilities and force him to wear a soiled diaper; or make him stand or kneel for long periods while shackled in a painful position. The captive could also be forced into a wooden box for up to 18 hours at a stretch.

Such techniques raised concerns among some agency officials, particularly members of a medical advisory group known as the Office of Medical Services (OMS). When the interrogation program began, the group “was neither consulted nor involved in the initial analysis of the risk and benefits” of enhanced interrogation techniques, according to a 2004 report by the CIA’s inspector general.

According to the report, the OMS did not issue formal medical guidelines until April 2003, after the waterboarding of Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the self-proclaimed mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks.
Over time, however, as the interrogation program was refined and strict guidelines were imposed on the use of certain techniques, the OMS began to play an increasingly pivotal role.

A 2005 Justice Department memo repeatedly referred to December 2004 OMS guidelines in assessing the application of coercive techniques, noting that the “OMS has, in fact, prohibited the use of certain techniques in the interrogation of certain detainees.”

The medical office appears to have been deeply skeptical of the use of waterboarding, a simulated-drowning technique that was suspended by 2004. OMS personnel told the inspector general that “the reported sophistication” of the preliminary review of waterboarding was “exaggerated,” and it said the power of the technique was “appreciably overstated.”

The OMS also raised serious concerns about the medical dangers of waterboarding.

“Most seriously, for reasons of physical fatigue or psychological resignation, the subject may simply give up, allowing excessive filling of the airways and loss of consciousness,” the OMS warned, according to the 2005 Justice Department memo.

Modifying the Program

Such warnings, combined with congressional concerns about the CIA’s secret prisons, gradually led the agency to modify the program. The menu of enhanced interrogation techniques was reduced from about a dozen to six, according to a Justice Department memo. Gone were nudity, walling, water-dousing, stress positions, cramped confinement in boxes and waterboarding. The proposed six techniques to be kept were dietary manipulation, sleep deprivation for up to 180 hours, the facial hold, the attention grasp, the abdominal slap and the insult slap.

The CIA said those techniques were “the minimum necessary to maintain an effective program.”

By the summer of 2006, the number of detainees in CIA prisons had dropped below 20, including 14 high-value detainees who were transferred to the secret Camp 7 at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Still, as late as 2006, many of the basic conditions remained, according to a Justice Department memo dated Aug. 31, 2006.

The facilities were constantly illuminated, and the agency used closed-circuit surveillance to monitor the prisoners at all times, suggesting that hidden cameras were placed inside cells.

“The detainee is isolated from most human contact, confined to his cell for much of each day, under constant surveillance, and is never permitted a moment to rest in the darkness and privacy that most people seek during sleep,” the memo said.

But, to combat mental problems, each detainee was given quarterly psychological examinations “to assess how well he is adapting to his confinement,” the memo said. Detainees also had regular access to gym equipment and physical exercise.

“The CIA also counteracts the psychological effects of isolation by providing detainees with a wide variety of books, puzzles, paper and ‘safe’ writing utensils, chess and checker sets, a personal journal, and access to DVD and VCR videotapes,” the document said.

Detainees were even allowed to grow back their hair and beards, which were shaved when they arrived.

“The CIA provides detainees with the option of shaving other parts of their bodies in recognition of specific Islamic practices,” according to the 2006 memo.

Source

These abuses were used on many detainees not just a few.

Seems they were rather common if you ask me.

Canadian Doctors host ‘A Celebration of Medicare in Canada’

August 28 2009

There is also a video at the site.

Canadian Doctors for Medicare hosted a celebration of Medicare in Canada. The speakers included Roy Romanow, former Saskatchewan Premier and Commissioner on Health Care in Canada.

The present debate in the U.S. over health care has at times resulted in having Canada’s health care system being shown to Americans in a negative light. The Canada Health Act’s 25th birthday party was thrown by an activist group of physicians known as Canadian Doctors for Medicare, which has set up shop in Saskatoon in a large part to act as a counterweight to the Canadian Medical Association’s reformist lobbying. Canadian Doctors for Medicare want to send a message to Americans telling them the Canadian universal health care system works and to encourage Americans to implement a single payer universal health care system. Former Premier of Saskatchewan Roy Romanow, who was also the man that headed up the Royal commission on health care in Canada says the system needs some work, but changes should not include privatization reports the Canadian Press. He said that the present debate in the U.S. “taps into Canadian emotions” and that “Canadians object to the misrepresentations of the Canadian health care system by a lot of the American opponents.” He said that 86 percent of Canadians rate their health care system as “high” and “are extremely satisfied with their services.” Continued vigilance and lobbying will be required to protect and improve Canada’s medicare system, Mr Romanow said. “A great responsibility rests on all of us who believe in medicare,” reports Canadian Medicine. Dr Danielle Martin followed Mr Romanow’s speech by arguing that evidence has shown publicly delivered, not-for-profit health care to be cheaper and of a higher quality than private, for-profit care. Another advantage, she said, can be seen in the difference between administrative costs in the health care systems of the United States and Canada. In the US, administrative costs represent 31% of health spending; in Canada that figure is just 1.3%. As attendees got ready to leave, one young med school graduate stood up at a microphone to invite people to her friend’s parents’ house to drink sangria and continue the conversation about health policy, proving once again that the Canada Health Act truly is an unusual piece of legislation. As Dr Nuala Kenny, the well-known retired Nova Scotia pediatrician and bio ethicist, said, “just compare the civil tone of Sunday’s Canada Health Act discussion to the wildly acrimonious attitudes we’ve seen on television at the health insurance reform town-hall meetings taking place now in the United States.”

Source

No advertising.

No Stockholders.

No Insurance lobbing.

No profiteering.

Saves a fortune for all concerned.

Published in: on August 29, 2009 at 12:17 am  Comments Off  
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Israel declares the shooting of American activist, Tristan Anderson to be an “act of war”


Israel declares the shooting of American activist, Tristan Anderson to be an “act of war.”Tristan Anderson, an American national, was critically injured on 13 March 2009 when he was shot with a high velocity tear-gas projectile during an unarmed demonstration against the Wall in the West Bank village of Ni’lin (report and video: http://palsolidarity.org/2009/03/5324).

The Israeli Ministry of Defense has notified the Anderson family’s lawyers that Israel perceives the incident on 13 March 2009 as an “act of war.” This classification was made despite the fact that Anderson’s shooting occurred during a civilian demonstration and there were no armed hostilities during the event or surrounding it.

The consequence of such classification is that according to Israeli law, the state of Israel is not liable for any damage its’ forces have caused.

Israeli police have completed their criminal investigation and passed the file to the district attorney of the Central District of the Israeli prosecution offices. The Anderson’s criminal attorney, Michael Sfard, is awaiting their decision.

According to Michael Sfard,

If a process by which unarmed civilian demonstration is classified by Israel as an ‘act of war,’ then clearly Israel admits that it is at war with civilians. International law identifies the incident as a clear case of human rights abuse. As such, Tristan and his family are undoubtedly entitled to justice and compensation. We will pursue this matter and take the government of Israel to court.

In addition to filing a criminal complaint against the State of Israel for the shooting of their son, the Andersons have submitted a notice of intent to file a civil suit.

Leah Tsemel, the civil suit attorney, stated,

This is another occasion where the Israeli government is alluding responsibility. The demonstrations that take place in Ni’lin and Bil’in are not acts of war. We will pursue, in Israeli courts and international courts if necessary, justice for the Anderson family.

Tristan Anderson was critically injured on 13 March 2009 when he was shot with a high-velocity tear gas projectile by Israeli forces. He was taken to Tel Hashomer hospital near Tel Aviv and to date remains in the hospital facilities. Tristan suffered multiple condensed fractures as a result of being hit in the right frontal lobe. He has had several life-saving surgeries and his prospects for recovery are unclear.

On 10 August 2009, Tristan underwent another surgery to reattach the top part of his skull, which was removed in order to save his life immediately after his shooting five months ago.

Several eye-witnesses have given testimony that Tristan was shot when he could not have been perceived as any threat to the forces in the area. He was shot from around 60 meters while standing with a few internationals and Palestinians, hours after the demonstration had dispersed from the construction site of the Wall.

“We are horrified and overwhelmed,” said Nancy Anderson during a press conference on 23 March 2009. “We are scared and really still in shock. To shoot peaceful demonstrators is really horrifying to us. What we want to ask is that the Israeli government publicly take full responsibility for the shooting of our son.” (audio of press conference held by the Andersons: http://www.alternativenews.org/news-from-within:-palestine/israel-podcasts/1854-news-from-within-podcast-press-conference-of-the-parents-of-american-activist-tristan-anderson-who-was-critically-injured-by-israeli-military.html)

Israeli forces have been systematically shooting tear-gas projectiles directly at demonstrators during protests at the West Bank Wall.

After Anderson’s shooting, the Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem requested the Judge Advocate General, Brig. Gen. Avichai Mandelblit, to immediately clarify to security forces that it is absolutely forbidden to directly aim tear-gas canisters, including extended-range type canisters, at demonstrators in the West Bank. B’Tselem also provided extensive video footage of demonstrations in Ni’lin, Bi’lin, and Jayyus showing repeated firing of tear-gas grenades directly at demonstrators, proving that, contrary to the army’s contentions, Israeli forces in the West Bank have commonly practiced this unlawful act. (report & video: http://www.btselem.org/English/Firearms/20090318_Firing_of_Tear_Gaz_at_Demonstrators.asp).

Following the killing of a Palestinian demonstrator in Bil’in, Basem Abu Rahme, by Israeli forces on 17 April 2009 with a high velocity tear gas projectile (report and video: http://palsolidarity.org/2009/04/6185), B’Tselem again demanded that the army enforce its Open-Fire Regulations and investigate the incidents (http://www.btselem.org/English/Firearms/20090422_Firing_Tear_Gaz_Canisters_directly_on_People.asp).

On 5 May 2009, Yehoshua Lemberger, deputy state attorney for criminal affairs of the Justice Ministry, asked the police to review the guidelines for dispersing protesters based on Rahme’s death and the police investigations of four additional incidents that occurred in Nil’in, including the shooting of Tristan Anderson (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1239710864477&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull).

Source

Act of war?????????? Who are they trying to kid. Attempted murder, and Murder would be more like it. The killing continues. Israel must be stopped. This type of thing happens all to often.

Testimony from Israeli soldiers/ Gaza

Israel targets Sweden over newspaper claim

Butchers: The hidden truth about Israel’s kidney theft ring

Swedish PM: No apology to Israel in regards to article Swedish newspaper reveals Israeli army murders Palestinians for their organs

U.S. group invests tax-free millions in East Jerusalem land

Gaza cancer patients have only painkillers, due to Israeli Blockade

Swedish newspaper reveals Israeli army murders Palestinians for their organs

Testimony from Israeli soldiers/ Gaza

As you read through this document you will note that there are many statements example, “they did use Palestinians as Human Shield’s”,  something the Leaders of Israel denied was happening. Apparently it was a pretty standard procedure.

There are many things that happened, that were denied by their leaders.

Seems the Leaders of the Israel were not honest with the public or the world. This in my opinion create much mistrust in anything they say.

So we should believe what they say “Because”?

As you read it you find there were little guidelines for soldiers  to follow. There was little clarity of what to do or what not to.  The statement “I don’t know” is very prevalent.

The one thing a few noted was the massive destruction and deaths, which in their opinion was not nessesary.

One was to skill anyone who was suspitious. If you bent down, or had a cell phone, are two examples. Just walking around could get you shot.

If you didn’t like the look of a home just destroy it.

One soldier said he just want to forget it all. Assuming everything will be fine now they are out of there. Nightmares of course will occur, memories cannot be erased.  The after math will unfold in time as all who were there will experience.

Many were confused. They just didn’t know. Seems to me these soldiers were left in the dark about many things.

“You feel like an infantile little kid with a magnifying glass looking at ants, burning them.”

Fifty-four testimonies of Israeli combat soldiers who participated in Operation Cast Lead reveal gaps between the reports given by the army following January’s events; the needless destruction of houses; firing phosphorous in populated areas and an atmosphere that encouraged shooting anywhere.

Testimony from Israeli soldiers/ Gaza

Israeli teenagers jailed for refusing to serve in army

One hears about Antisemite all the time, but in actual fact, if you look in a dictionary just about anywhere the actual meaning is far greater then what most realize.

Sem·ite (sěm’īt’)
A member of a group of Semitic-speaking peoples of the Near East and Northern Africa, including the Arabs, Arameans, Babylonians, Carthaginians, Ethiopians, Hebrews,  Phoenicians,  Jews or a Bible descendant of Shem.

The Jewish people are among the above group, but all of  the above are Semite.

So to all who have use “antisemitism“,  in any form have been terribly misguided.

Israel targets Sweden over newspaper claim

By Alastair Macdonald in Jerusalem

August 24 2009

'The statements in the Swedish press were outrageous' - Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu

Photo/AP

‘The statements in the Swedish press were outrageous’ – Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu

Israel placed curbs on Swedish journalists yesterday as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu urged Stockholm to condemn a newspaper article that Israeli officials say recalled historic hatred of Jews in Europe.

Israel’s foreign minister compared it to the Dreyfus Affair – the trial of a Jewish officer in the French army a century ago, which drew attention to anti-Semitism across the continent and inspired Zionists to promote Jewish emigration to Palestine.

Sweden has said press freedom means it cannot intervene in a dispute over the tabloid Aftonbladet’s reprinting last Monday of long-standing Palestinian allegations that the Israeli army may have taken organs for transplants from men who died in custody.

“The statements in the Swedish press were outrageous,” Mr Netanyahu was quoted as telling his cabinet, in his first comment on the issue. “We are not expecting an apology from the Swedish government… we are expecting condemnation.”

The official quoting him said the premier, who will be in Europe this week visiting London and Berlin, echoed colleagues in comparing the article to medieval “blood libels”, which alleged Jews used the blood of Christian babies in religious rites.

A spokesman for Israel’s Interior Ministry said it was “freezing” the issue of entry visas to Swedish journalists, although those already working in the country would not be affected for now.

The dispute has soured relations with the country that holds the rotating presidency of the European Union just as Israel is defending its treatment of the Palestinians against criticism in Europe of January’s war in Gaza and settlement in the West Bank.

Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt said last week his country opposed anti-Semitism but would not muzzle the media. A ministry spokeswoman declined comment on a report that Sweden’s ambassador to Israel was reprimanded for issuing a statement condemning the Aftonbladet article as “appalling”. The statement was no longer on the embassy’s website yesterday.

Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, the leader of a right-wing coalition party whose outspoken criticisms of Arabs have prompted accusations of racism, praised the ambassador and compared her to Raoul Wallenberg, a Swedish diplomat who acted on his own initiative to save Hungarian Jews from the Holocaust.

Dismissing Sweden’s argument about press freedom as a “fig leaf” for inaction, Mr Lieberman told Army Radio: “What angers us is that the Swedish government didn’t condemn it but hastened to reprimand the ambassador who did find it right to condemn this blood libel, which recalls the Dreyfus Affair.”

He also compared the article to “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion”, an anti-Semitic tract purporting to show a global Jewish conspiracy which was widely cited by Hitler among others.

Israeli officials say Europeans often favour Palestinians at their expense and Netanyahu’s government is trying to counter that.

Source

Considering this happened in Israel just a few years back.

Abu Kabir Operating Organ Warehouse

January 4 2002
By IsraelNationalNews.com
“Abu Kabir Operating Organ Warehouse”
State Attorney General Elyakim Rubinstein ordered police to launch an investigation against Prof. Yehuda Hiss, the nation’s senior pathologist
and director of the Abu Kabir Forensic Institute.

Hiss is accused of a long list of charges from inappropriate behavior as a medical professional to criminal acts such as the illegal sale of and dealings in organs and body parts, removing organs from deceased persons without consent, and misrepresenting organs in returned bodies.

Allegations made against Hiss in some cases include his taking organs without consent, placing the cardboard center of toilet paper rolls and metallic rods in their place to fill the voids in the body and hide the theft of the organs.

A court-ordered search of the institute revealed large supplies of stored organs taken illegally from bodies. Over the past years, heads of the institute appear to have given thousands of organs for research without permission, while maintaining a “storehouse” of organs at Abu Kabir.

Organs belonging to soldiers killed in various circumstances were found in the institute during a surprise search this week. After consulting with Chief Chaplain Brig. Gen. Rabbi Yisrael Weiss, it was decided that in concert with the bereaved families, graves would be opened and the organs buried along with the remains of each soldier involved.

Some belonged to soldier’s, but where did the rest come from? There were thousands of organs. They didn’t just magically appear in the Organ Warehouse.  I wonder?

Also from December of 2001

Romanian authorities are looking into possible links between Israeli adoption agencies and an illegal global conspiracy to sell organs for transplants.The Romanian Embassy in Israel has asked for, and received from the Labor and Social Affairs Ministry, a list of all children born in Romania who have been brought to Israel for adoption in recent years. The Romanian officials are trying to ascertain if all such children arrived in Israel with all organs in their bodies.

In its request to the Labor and Social Affairs Ministry, the Romanians did not offer evidence in support of suspicions of a link between adoption and organ trafficking. The inquiry is part of a broader investigation involving Romanian children sent to Italy and the United States.

As Ha’aretz has reported in the past, some Israeli physicians were involved in illegal kidney transplants and the sale of human eggs in Turkey, Romania, and other countries in East Europe.

In parallel with the organ investigation, officials from Romania’s central adoption agency and from Israel’s Labor and Social Affairs Ministry and police, are also examining possible criminal activity of two groups dealing with the adoption of Romanian children by Israeli parents.

Among other suspicions, officials are checking whether one Romanian group, headed by an Israeli, has forged adoption papers, and whether children have been offered to Israeli parents without proper, legal process.

Responding to complaints and rumors, Romanian authorities have taken the highly unusual step in the past year of withholding authorization for the adoption of 16 Romanian babies destined for Israeli parents. This delay has been enforced although the Israeli couples have paid $20,000 each to adopt the infants, and have already become acquainted with the babies in the foster homes and institutions where they are being held. Romanian authorities insist they will not give the go ahead for the adoptions until inquiries about possible wrong-doing are completed.

To help finalize the adoptions, the Labor and Social Affairs Ministry turned to President Moshe Katsav and asked him to raise the issue with Prime Minister Adrian Nastase when he visited Israel last July. Foreign Minister Shimon Peres also raised it with Romanian officials during his recent visit there.

Parents affiliated with the “Future of the Children” group, based in Rehovot, have also appealed to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to help finalize the adoptions of the Romanian children

From WHO

Organ transplantation is an effective therapy for end-stage organ failure and is widely practised around the world. According to WHO, kidney transplants are carried out in 91 countries. Around 66 000 kidney transplants, 21 000 liver transplants and 6000 heart transplants were performed globally in 2005.

The organ-exporting countries

Other countries where kidneys are reportedly sold include Bolivia, Brazil, Iraq, Israel, the Republic of Moldova, Peru and Turkey.19 In Colombia, where 69 of 873 organ transplants were performed on foreigners, there is an allegation that organs of deceased donors were used in the organ transplants that were commercially arranged for foreigners.20 The case of the Islamic Republic of Iran merits a special mention: paid kidney donation is practiced legally but there is a strict regulation of the allocation of organs to non-local citizens, thereby restricting the international organ trade.21 In contrast, the Philippine government is moving towards institutionalization of paid kidney donation and acceptance of foreign patients.4

Source

The organ-importing countries

The term “organ-importing countries” is used here to refer to the countries of origin of the patients going overseas to purchase organs for transplantation. A report by Organs Watch, an organization based at the University of California, USA, identified Australia, Canada, Israel, Japan, Oman, Saudi Arabia and the USA as major organ-importing countries.19

OF course while everyone is rambling on about the Swedish paper the bombing on Gaza continues and so does the blockade.
Israeli airstrike on Gaza smuggling tunnel kills 3 in deadliest attack on border in months

Israeli airstrike on Gaza smuggling tunnel kills 3 in deadliest attack on border in months

DIAA HADID,MOHAMMED DARAGHMEH, THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
August 25, 2009

// //

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip – An Israeli airstrike on a smuggling tunnel between the Gaza Strip and Egypt killed three Palestinians inside and wounded seven on Tuesday in the deadliest Israeli attack on the volatile border area in months, a Palestinian Health Ministry official said.The Israeli military said the air force struck in retaliation for a mortar attack from Gaza Monday into southern Israel that lightly wounded an Israeli soldier. The Israeli government has pledged a military response to every attack.

Fighting between Israel and Gaza militants has largely subsided since a fierce Israeli offensive in January, but Israel and Egypt have maintained a tight economic blockade of the coastal area to maintain pressure on the militant Hamas government.

In Gaza, the men killed and wounded were all smugglers caught in a tunnel during the pre-dawn Israeli strike, said Gaza Health Ministry official Dr. Moaiya Hassanain.

The prime minister of the Hamas government, Ismail Haniyeh, said such violence threatened to unravel an informal cease-fire that has largely held for seven months.

Hundreds of Gazans work in tunnels used to bring in goods not available in the seaside territory because of the blockade. Israel says Hamas uses the tunnels to smuggle in weapons and explosives.

Later Tuesday, the Israeli military said soldiers shot and lightly wounded a Palestinian who crossed into Israel from Gaza near the sensitive Nahal Oz fuel depot. He was taken to an Israeli hospital for treatment. The depot has been attacked by Gaza militants in the past.

As violence in Gaza was heating up, the leader of the Western-backed Palestinian government in the West Bank unveiled a development plan that calls for construction of an airport, international rail lines and an oil refinery over the next two years. Prime Minister Salam Fayyad said the projects would help pave the way for independence.

The program reflected Palestinian frustration after years of on-again, off-again peace talks aimed at ending the decades-long conflict with Israel. With peacemaking efforts currently on hold, the Palestinians must move forward on their own, Fayyad said.

“We believe that full commitment to the state-building endeavour will advance our highest national priority of ending the (Israeli) occupation, thereby enabling us to live in freedom and dignity in a country of our own,” he said.

It remained unclear how Fayyad, an internationally respected economist, expects to carry out the projects. Israel occupies the West Bank and would need to grant approval for major development projects. It was also unclear how Fayyad’s cash-strapped government would finance construction.

Fayyad said further information would be given to the proper ministries as plans develop.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has grudgingly endorsed the concept a Palestinian state with limited powers, while supporting improving relations by strengthening the Palestinian economy.

Israel’s deputy foreign minister, Danny Ayalon, gave Fayyad’s plan a cool reception.

“Neither artificial dates nor arbitrary deadlines are going to work,” he said. “What is going to make a Palestinian state viable is the end of conflict, the end of all the Palestinian claims, meeting us halfway with political compromises, and, of course, sitting with us without preconditions.”

The Palestinians have said they will not open negotiations until Israel halts all construction in Jewish settlements built on land claimed by the Palestinians. President Barack Obama has also called for a settlement freeze. The subject was expected to be the main topic in talks in London Tuesday between Netanyahu and Obama’s Mideast envoy, George Mitchell.

The internal split between the rival Palestinian governments in Gaza and the West Bank has further complicated peace efforts, since the Palestinians hope to build their state in both territories.

Of course they always say it was in retaliation of a mortar attack. That is getting rather old it seems.
They lied about organ theft they are probably lieing about this. If they steal organs from their own, they surely would steal them from Palestinians.

Butchers: The hidden truth about Israel’s kidney theft ring

Swedish PM: No apology to Israel in regards to article Swedish newspaper reveals Israeli army murders Palestinians for their organs

Gaza cancer patients have only painkillers, due to Israeli Blockade

Swedish newspaper reveals Israeli army murders Palestinians for their organs

Blackwater Founder Implicated in Murder

Private Isn’t Always Better, at Least Not With Vital Functions

By David Mittleman Attorney

August 23, 2009

Sometimes a private option isn’t always the best one. While it is well documented how the powerful Blackwater USA private military organization was responsible for various atrocities in Iraq, sworn statements filed in a federal court in Virginia indicate that Blackwater founder Erik Prince (brother-in-law to Dick DeVos) instructed and orchestrated the murder of individuals who were planning on providing incriminating information to the federal government. Yes, the same Erik Prince who has given generous support to not only brother-in-law Dick DeVos, but gubernatorial hopeful Pete Hoekstra.

In a truly surreal description of events by two former Blackwater employees, whose identities are being kept secret to keep them safe from retaliation, their sworn statements describe activities from illegal smuggling of weapons into Iraq, hiring of guards who were not properly cleared by the State Department, blatant failure to report misconduct to the State Department, to the destruction of any incriminating evidence.

Meanwhile, as the debate rages on across the country over whether or not a public option for health care is a good thing, consider statement 12 by John Doe #2, who states that “Mr. Prince is motivated by greed. He sought every opportunity to deploy to Iraq in order to earn more money from the United States government. Mr. Prince and his top manager Gary Jackson knew the men being deployed were not suitable candidates for carrying lethal weaponry, but did not care because deployments meant more money.” Those are harsh allegations, but if true, what is the lesson? The lesson is perhaps that sometimes there are some fundamental health and safety functions, such as keeping us healthy and keeping us safe, that should not be so perilously connected to private enterprise, whose only real objective is to increase profit. The lesson is perhaps that we cannot rely on corporate interests to police themselves, when doing so poses even the slightest harm of reducing profits. The lesson is long overdue.

Source

Blackwater Founder Implicated in Murder

By Jeremy Scahill
The Nation
August 9, 2009

Founder and CEO of Blackwater Worldwide Erik Prince stands in the company’s offices in North Carolina. (Photo: AP)


A former Blackwater employee and an ex-US Marine who has worked as a security operative for the company have made a series of explosive allegations in sworn statements filed on August 3 in federal court in Virginia. The two men claim that the company’s owner, Erik Prince, may have murdered or facilitated the murder of individuals who were cooperating with federal authorities investigating the company. The former employee also alleges that Prince “views himself as a Christian crusader tasked with eliminating Muslims and the Islamic faith from the globe,” and that Prince’s companies “encouraged and rewarded the destruction of Iraqi life.”

In their testimony, both men also allege that Blackwater was smuggling weapons into Iraq. One of the men alleges that Prince turned a profit by transporting “illegal” or “unlawful” weapons into the country on Prince’s private planes. They also charge that Prince and other Blackwater executives destroyed incriminating videos, emails and other documents and have intentionally deceived the US State Department and other federal agencies. The identities of the two individuals were sealed out of concerns for their safety.

These allegations, and a series of other charges, are contained in sworn affidavits, given under penalty of perjury, filed late at night on August 3 in the Eastern District of Virginia as part of a seventy-page motion by lawyers for Iraqi civilians suing Blackwater for alleged war crimes and other misconduct. Susan Burke, a private attorney working in conjunction with the Center for Constitutional Rights, is suing Blackwater in five separate civil cases filed in the Washington, DC, area. They were recently consolidated before Judge T.S. Ellis III of the Eastern District of Virginia for pretrial motions. Burke filed the August 3 motion in response to Blackwater’s motion to dismiss the case. Blackwater asserts that Prince and the company are innocent of any wrongdoing and that they were professionally performing their duties on behalf of their employer, the US State Department.

The former employee, identified in the court documents as “John Doe #2,” is a former member of Blackwater’s management team, according to a source close to the case. Doe #2 alleges in a sworn declaration that, based on information provided to him by former colleagues, “it appears that Mr. Prince and his employees murdered, or had murdered, one or more persons who have provided information, or who were planning to provide information, to the federal authorities about the ongoing criminal conduct.” John Doe #2 says he worked at Blackwater for four years; his identity is concealed in the sworn declaration because he “fear[s] violence against me in retaliation for submitting this Declaration.” He also alleges, “On several occasions after my departure from Mr. Prince’s employ, Mr. Prince’s management has personally threatened me with death and violence.”

In a separate sworn statement, the former US marine who worked for Blackwater in Iraq alleges that he has “learned from my Blackwater colleagues and former colleagues that one or more persons who have provided information, or who were planning to provide information about Erik Prince and Blackwater have been killed in suspicious circumstances.” Identified as “John Doe #1,” he says he “joined Blackwater and deployed to Iraq to guard State Department and other American government personnel.” It is not clear if Doe #1 is still working with the company as he states he is “scheduled to deploy in the immediate future to Iraq.” Like Doe #2, he states that he fears “violence” against him for “submitting this Declaration.” No further details on the alleged murder(s) are provided.

“Mr. Prince feared, and continues to fear, that the federal authorities will detect and prosecute his various criminal deeds,” states Doe #2. “On more than one occasion, Mr. Prince and his top managers gave orders to destroy emails and other documents. Many incriminating videotapes, documents and emails have been shredded and destroyed.”

The Nation cannot independently verify the identities of the two individuals, their roles at Blackwater or what motivated them to provide sworn testimony in these civil cases. Both individuals state that they have previously cooperated with federal prosecutors conducting a criminal inquiry into Blackwater.

“It’s a pending investigation, so we cannot comment on any matters in front of a Grand Jury or if a Grand Jury even exists on these matters,” John Roth, the spokesperson for the US Attorney’s office in the District of Columbia, told The Nation. “It would be a crime if we did that.” Asked specifically about whether there is a criminal investigation into Prince regarding the murder allegations and other charges, Roth said: “We would not be able to comment on what we are or are not doing in regards to any possible investigation involving an uncharged individual.”

The Nation repeatedly attempted to contact spokespeople for Prince or his companies at numerous email addresses and telephone numbers. When a company representative was reached by phone and asked to comment, she said, “Unfortunately no one can help you in that area.” The representative then said that she would pass along The Nation’s request. As this article goes to press, no company representative has responded further to The Nation.

Doe #2 states in the declaration that he has also provided the information contained in his statement “in grand jury proceedings convened by the United States Department of Justice.” Federal prosecutors convened a grand jury in the aftermath of the September 16, 2007, Nisour Square shootings in Baghdad, which left seventeen Iraqis dead. Five Blackwater employees are awaiting trial on several manslaughter charges and a sixth, Jeremy Ridgeway, has already pleaded guilty to manslaughter and attempting to commit manslaughter and is cooperating with prosecutors. It is not clear whether Doe #2 testified in front of the Nisour Square grand jury or in front of a separate grand jury.

The two declarations are each five pages long and contain a series of devastating allegations concerning Erik Prince and his network of companies, which now operate under the banner of Xe Services LLC. Among those leveled by Doe #2 is that Prince “views himself as a Christian crusader tasked with eliminating Muslims and the Islamic faith from the globe”:

To that end, Mr. Prince intentionally deployed to Iraq certain men who shared his vision of Christian supremacy, knowing and wanting these men to take every available opportunity to murder Iraqis. Many of these men used call signs based on the Knights of the Templar, the warriors who fought the Crusades.

Mr. Prince operated his companies in a manner that encouraged and rewarded the destruction of Iraqi life. For example, Mr. Prince’s executives would openly speak about going over to Iraq to “lay Hajiis out on cardboard.” Going to Iraq to shoot and kill Iraqis was viewed as a sport or game. Mr. Prince’s employees openly and consistently used racist and derogatory terms for Iraqis and other Arabs, such as “ragheads” or “hajiis.”

Among the additional allegations made by Doe #1 is that “Blackwater was smuggling weapons into Iraq.” He states that he personally witnessed weapons being “pulled out” from dog food bags. Doe #2 alleges that “Prince and his employees arranged for the weapons to be polywrapped and smuggled into Iraq on Mr. Prince’s private planes, which operated under the name Presidential Airlines,” adding that Prince “generated substantial revenues from participating in the illegal arms trade.”

Doe #2 states: “Using his various companies, [Prince] procured and distributed various weapons, including unlawful weapons such as sawed off semi-automatic machine guns with silencers, through unlawful channels of distribution.” Blackwater “was not abiding by the terms of the contract with the State Department and was deceiving the State Department,” according to Doe #1.

This is not the first time an allegation has surfaced that Blackwater used dog food bags to smuggle weapons into Iraq. ABC News’s Brian Ross reported in November 2008 that a “federal grand jury in North Carolina is investigating allegations the controversial private security firm Blackwater illegally shipped assault weapons and silencers to Iraq, hidden in large sacks of dog food.” Another former Blackwater employee has also confirmed this information to The Nation.

Both individuals allege that Prince and Blackwater deployed individuals to Iraq who, in the words of Doe #1, “were not properly vetted and cleared by the State Department.” Doe #2 adds that “Prince ignored the advice and pleas from certain employees, who sought to stop the unnecessary killing of innocent Iraqis.” Doe #2 further states that some Blackwater officials overseas refused to deploy “unfit men” and sent them back to the US. Among the reasons cited by Doe #2 were “the men making statements about wanting to deploy to Iraq to ‘kill ragheads’ or achieve ‘kills’ or ‘body counts,’” as well as “excessive drinking” and “steroid use.” However, when the men returned to the US, according to Doe #2, “Prince and his executives would send them back to be deployed in Iraq with an express instruction to the concerned employees located overseas that they needed to ‘stop costing the company money.’”

Doe #2 also says Prince “repeatedly ignored the assessments done by mental health professionals, and instead terminated those mental health professionals who were not willing to endorse deployments of unfit men.” He says Prince and then-company president Gary Jackson “hid from Department of State the fact that they were deploying men to Iraq over the objections of mental health professionals and security professionals in the field,” saying they “knew the men being deployed were not suitable candidates for carrying lethal weaponry, but did not care because deployments meant more money.”

Doe #1 states that “Blackwater knew that certain of its personnel intentionally used excessive and unjustified deadly force, and in some instances used unauthorized weapons, to kill or seriously injure innocent Iraqi civilians.” He concludes, “Blackwater did nothing to stop this misconduct.” Doe #1 states that he “personally observed multiple incidents of Blackwater personnel intentionally using unnecessary, excessive and unjustified deadly force.” He then cites several specific examples of Blackwater personnel firing at civilians, killing or “seriously” wounding them, and then failing to report the incidents to the State Department.

Doe #1 also alleges that “all of these incidents of excessive force were initially videotaped and voice recorded,” but that “Immediately after the day concluded, we would watch the video in a session called a ‘hot wash.’ Immediately after the hotwashing, the video was erased to prevent anyone other than Blackwater personnel seeing what had actually occurred.” Blackwater, he says, “did not provide the video to the State Department.”

Doe #2 expands on the issue of unconventional weapons, alleging Prince “made available to his employees in Iraq various weapons not authorized by the United States contracting authorities, such as hand grenades and hand grenade launchers. Mr. Prince’s employees repeatedly used this illegal weaponry in Iraq, unnecessarily killing scores of innocent Iraqis.” Specifically, he alleges that Prince “obtained illegal ammunition from an American company called LeMas. This company sold ammunition designed to explode after penetrating within the human body. Mr. Prince’s employees repeatedly used this illegal ammunition in Iraq to inflict maximum damage on Iraqis.”

Blackwater has gone through an intricate rebranding process in the twelve years it has been in business, changing its name and logo several times. Prince also has created more than a dozen affiliate companies, some of which are registered offshore and whose operations are shrouded in secrecy. According to Doe #2, “Prince created and operated this web of companies in order to obscure wrongdoing, fraud and other crimes.”

“For example, Mr. Prince transferred funds from one company (Blackwater) to another (Greystone) whenever necessary to avoid detection of his money laundering and tax evasion schemes.” He added: “Mr. Prince contributed his personal wealth to fund the operations of the Prince companies whenever he deemed such funding necessary. Likewise, Mr. Prince took funds out of the Prince companies and placed the funds in his personal accounts at will.”

Briefed on the substance of these allegations by The Nation, Congressman Dennis Kucinich replied, “If these allegations are true, Blackwater has been a criminal enterprise defrauding taxpayers and murdering innocent civilians.” Kucinich is on the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and has been investigating Prince and Blackwater since 2004.

“Blackwater is a law unto itself, both internationally and domestically. The question is why they operated with impunity. In addition to Blackwater, we should be questioning their patrons in the previous administration who funded and employed this organization. Blackwater wouldn’t exist without federal patronage; these allegations should be thoroughly investigated,” Kucinich said.

A hearing before Judge Ellis in the civil cases against Blackwater is scheduled for August 7.

Source

Also see

A number of Iraqi victims and victims’ families have filed a lawsuit against Blackwater August 23 2009

Making Sense Of The Blackwater Connection August 21, 2009

New Blackwater Iraq Scandal: Guns, Silencers and Dog Food Ex-employees Tell ABC News the Firm Used Dog Food Sacks to Smuggle Unauthorized Weapons to Iraq: From November 14, 2008


Butchers: The hidden truth about Israel’s kidney theft ring

Butchers: The hidden truth about Israel’s kidney theft ring


By Joseph Cannon
Cannonfire via Uruknet
Saturday, Aug 1, 2009

Editor’s Note: This report by Joseph Cannon includes his second follow-up report below. First the Zionists starve the Gazans with their blockade. Then they bomb the defenseless people inside the prison they’ve created for them. Then, with the complicity of the government of Israel, major “respected” U.S. hospitals and corrupt politicians, they sell the organs of some of the remaining Palestinians in their lucrative market in New York. What unconscionable behavior this is. What kind of beast is this. – LMB



38.aptopix_corruption_arrests_nyll109.jpg

July 31, 2009

(Note: This is a major story. Although I’ve done no original “in the field” research, I’ve stitched together published material in a way that reveals the true authorship of this crime. You won’t learn about the complicity of the Israeli government anywhere else.)

Where do the kidneys come from?

I’m talking about the kidneys offered by an “organist” named Izzy Rosenbaum. The FBI scooped him up in a corruption probe that focused on pay-offs to New Jersey pols (nothing surprising about that) and money laundering by prominent rabbis:

The probe also uncovered Levy Izhak Rosenbaum of Brooklyn, who is accused of conspiring to broker the sale of a human kidney for a transplant. According to the complaint, Rosenbaum said he had been brokering sale of kidneys for 10 years.

“His business was to entice vulnerable people to give up a kidney for $10,000 which he would turn around and sell for $160,000,” said Marra.

Marra is a US attorney involved with the case. News accounts like the one quoted above have led the public to believe that the “donors” were both willing and compensated, and that this operation was purely private. But good evidence indicates that the matter is far, far more troubling.

The kidneys were “donated” at gunpoint by unwilling victims.

The Israeli government directed Rosenbaum’s grisly scheme.

Major American hospitals wittingly participated in the plot.

Before we get to that evidence, let us confront two simple questions: Whose kidneys, exactly, were taken? And what kind of doctor would extract a kidney from a healthy patient?

“I am what you call a matchmaker,” the complaint quotes Rosenbaum as telling the undercover agent.

Had the transaction been real, federal authorities said, it would have been the most recent chapter in Rosenbaum’s 10-year career as an illicit middleman. In each case, he would take a blood sample from a prospective recipient and give it to an associate at an insurance company who could analyze it at a lab without arousing suspicion. The sample would then be shipped to Israel, and the necessary people paid off to find a match.

“He prayed on vulnerable people, ” said assistant US district attorney Mark McCarron.

Rosenbaum would then arrange the donor’s flight to New York, including obtaining a visa, authorities said. Once the donor arrived in the US, Rosenbaum would help fabricate a relationship between donor and recipient — a story both would repeat during interviews with medical professionals. The two might pretend to business associates, for instance, or close friends from a religious congregation.

“The hospitals seemed to be in the dark,” McCarron said.

As we shall see, we should take that last statement with a grain of salt roughly the size of Lot’s wife.

A close reading of the actual indictment of Rosenbaum (pdf) is troubling. Rosenbaum spilled his guts (so to speak) to an undercover informant posing as a prospective organ purchaser. During these interviews, an FBI agent posed as the purchaser’s secretary.

Let’s look at some excerpts from the indictment. “UC” refers to the informant, whose real name is Solomon Dwek.

The UC asked defendant ROSENBAUM how defendant ROSENBAUM could obtain a kidney on behalf of UC’s uncle, and defendant ROSENBAUM explained that defendant ROSENBAUM could send a blood sample from the UC’s uncle to Israel to find a matching prospective donor. Defendant ROSENBAUM added that “if you want to arrange it faster, then I, I bring the donor over here… The hospital is the authority who decide it’s a match or not. Not me, not you, not him, not nobody.”

Defendant ROSENBAUM then explained that it would be necessary to fabricate some sort of relationship between the donor and the recipient. Defendant ROSENBAUM stated that “we put together something–-the relationship. The hospital is asking what’s the relationship between” the donor and the recipient. Defendant ROSENBAUM continued, “So we put in a relationship, friends, or neighbor, or business relations, any relation.”

Defendant ROSENBAUM explained that he was not a surgeon and that once he had brought a willing donor to this country, “it’s beyond my control.” He did add that “I take care of [the donor] after, after the surgery also.” When pressed on this last point, defendant ROSENBAUM explained that “I place him somewhere,” to look after the donor. Defendant ROSENBAUM further stated: “You have to babysit him like a baby because he may have a language problem, maybe not.” Defendant ROSENBAUM explained the process of finding a donor in Israel and stated that “[t]here are people over there hurting . . . One of the reasons it’s so expensive is because you have to shmear (meaning pay various individuals for their assistance) all the time.”

11. Defendant ROSENBAUM indicated that among those who would need to be paid were the donor and the doctors in Israel who would examine the donor, and further added that there would be expenses incurred for preparing the Visa work and paying the donor’s expenses while in the United States.

The only evidence that the donor would be willing came from Rosenbaum, who had the following motives for lying:

1. He needed to ease the conscience of the prospective recipient.

2. He needed to justify the large amount of cash involved.

3. He needed to protect the hospitals and doctors involved with his operation. Rosenbaum understood that he was engaged in a risky business, and that even if he got caught, he would still need to provide cover for any hospital or surgeon connected to this wretched business.

Do we have evidence of that the donors were coerced? Yes. In fact, we have the testimony of an “insider” witness:

Nancy Scheper-Hughes of the University of California, Berkeley, was and is very clear as to Rosenbaum’s role in the ring.

“He is the main U.S. broker for an international trafficking network,” she said.

Her sources include a man who started working with Rosenbaum imagining he was helping people in desperate need. The man then began to see the donors, or to be more accurate, sellers, who were flown in from impoverished countries such as Moldova.

“He said it was awful. These people would be brought in and they didn’t even know what they were supposed to be doing and they would want to go home and they would cry,” Scheper-Hughes said.

The man called Rosenbaum “a thug” who would pull out a pistol he was apparently licensed to carry and tell the sellers, “You’re here. A deal is a deal. Now, you’ll give us a kidney or you’ll never go home.’

(Moldava, incidentally, is a small country bordering the Ukraine.)

Scheper-Hughes, who is writing a book on this topic, went to the FBI in 2002. They dismissed her evidence. The State Department issued a 2004 report which labeled organ trafficking an “urban legend.” By contrast, authorities in other countries acted on her leads and made arrests.

Scheper-Hughes had better luck in Brazil and in South Africa, where law enforcement corroborated her findings and acted decisively.

But the ring kept operating elsewhere. Scheper-Hughes visited villages in Moldova where, “20% of the men were siphoned off to be kidney sellers in this same scheme.”

We must now pause to re-think Rosenbaum’s statements to the FBI informant. How could any rational person working for a hospital buy the story that the recipients — American Jews — attended services with Brazilians and Africans?

You can see a lecture by the heroic Nancy Scheper-Hughes here. The video also gives her resume, which is extremely impressive. Her testimony to a House subcommittee is here.

NPR’s Brian Lehrer interviewed Scheper-Hughes yesterday morning. An excerpt:

I had begun to unravel a huge network — a criminal network that really looks like, smells like, kind of a mafia. The head office of the pyramid scheme originated in Israel, with brokers placed in Turkey; in New York City; in Philadelphia; in Durban; in Johannesburg; in Recife, Brazil; Moldova — all over the place. And I used my ethnographic investigative skills to just go country-hopping and try to connect the dots.

Eventually, it brought me to Isaac Rosenbaum being the head broker for Ilan Peri in Israel, who is the don, basically, of the operation, and who is a slippery guy. The Israelis tried to nail him and arrest him. They tried to get him on tax evasion and he escaped to Germany. I think he’s back in Israel.

A cynic might posit that Mr. Peri has what Mossad calls “a horse” pulling for him. (A “horse” is an Israeli slang term for a big shot offering covert aid.) Although he has left a very scant public trail, Mr. Peri and his operation are mentioned in this 2004 story.

This fascinating article from Agence-France Presse offers blockbuster information. A retired Israeli army officer named Geldaya Tauber Gady was arrested in Brazil for his participation in this international organ trafficking ring. (I suspect that the information from Scheper-Hughes — which was taken seriously in Brazil — led to Gady’s arrest.)

He told the court that the Israeli government financed the operation. Not only that:

Gady told the court that an Israeli government official, identified only as Ilan, put him in touch with an intermediary in Brazil…

Gady’s courtroom testimony puts the Rosenbaum case in an entirely new light.

The American media’s coverage has led the public to believe that Rosenbaum’s kidney trafficking was purely a matter of private enrichment. But a former Israeli officer has said under oath that the Israeli government runs this ring, and that the master of the ring — “Ilan” is obviously Ilan Peri — functions as an agent of that government.

(Now I’m wondering: Was the Israeli government involved with the money laundering conducted through New Jersey synagogues?)

Frankly, I suspect that Scheper-Hughes knows all about Gady’s testimony and its implications for the Rosenbaum case. She probably has chosen to keep mum about it in order not to lose credibility with the American media.

The Lehrer interview with Scheper-Hughes goes on to deliver more details about her findings in Moldova. In villages there, many young men reported that they had been told that they expect to find work in other countries (including the United States) as house painters. Once in the new country, they were forced to give up their kidneys.

According to Scheper-Hughes’ informant within Rosenbaum’s organization, confused and disoriented Russians would be flown into New York City by Israeli brokers who forced them at gunpoint to “donate” kidneys.

Scheper-Hughes: They told me the names of the hospitals, and they were our best hospitals!

Brian Lehrer: And did they know, professor, that they were performing kidney surgery on people who were unwilling participants and were being exploited and threatened?

Scheper-Hughes: My sense is, how could some of them not have known? The people that arrived, some of them didn’t speak the same languages, they were poor, they were disoriented…

We have rules. We have transplant coordinating committees. We have ethical guidelines. And you don’t just let people walk in off the streets.

She goes on to name Mount Sinai hospital, against whom she has videotaped evidence. She brought the videotape to the attention of 60 Minutes, which did not broadcast it. Later in the interview, she refers to operations done at Albert Einstein Medical Center. Mount Sinai says that its kidney donors “undergo an extensive evaluation to provide for their safety and well-being.”

Over the years, many have accused Israel of trafficking in the organs of Palestinians. The Palestinians themselves have no doubt that the practice is common.

Unfortunately, many of the websites trumpeting charges of Israeli organ theft often display an undeniable anti-Semitic bent. Some of the allegations I’ve looked into do indeed appear to be spurious. (I would, for example, dismiss any claim that traces back to so notorious a source as La Voz de Atlan.) But before you categorize all such accusations as fantasies, consider: As recently as 2004, the State Department officially denounced as mythical the claim that organ trafficking occurs in the United States. As we now know, that “myth” had a basis in reality.

Knee-jerk accusations of anti-Semitism should not deter us from conducting candid and unbiased research into Israel’s record. I would note that those who discuss organ trafficking in India and China are not accused of racial animosity toward the Indians or the Chinese.

This online book
is written to a high standard and cites responsible sources, including Scheper-Hughes. The endnotes attribute the following story to the respected author David Yallop:

West Bank, 8th of February 1988

Nineteen years old Khader Elias Tarazi, a Christian Palestinian, went shopping for groceries in the Gaza. Upon returning with two bags on his bicycle he crossed a road near a demonstration where stone throwers were fleeing Israeli Army soldiers. The soldiers grabbed Khader and beat his head and body with truncheons. Shopkeepers shouted that Khader wasn’t involved but soldiers broke one of Khader’s arms and a leg. They continued the beating then threw him onto the bonnet of their jeep handcuffing the now unconscious Khader to the front crash bar. They drove off continually braking hard whereupon he sustained further injuries including a broken back, skull injuries and his face kept banging against the bonnet.

The Israeli doctor at the Military Prison in Gaza refused to attend Khader because of his serious injuries and inadequate paperwork. He was taken to Ansar Two prison and thrown into a prisoner tent holding thirty to forty prisoners. The other Palestinian prisoners screamed that he must be taken to hospital and the guards responded by forcing them to strip naked and stand outside in the winter cold. Khader died in the tent and later was taken to Soroka Hospital in Beer Sheva and pronounced dead.

Khader’s mother was outside the prison where Israeli officials denied they had a prisoner by his name inside. Later, they admitted he was inside but said he must have been very sick when he went out shopping because he was now dead.

Israeli officials refused to hand over the body and it was transferred to Abu Kabeer hospital, officially for a post-mortem. Mrs Tarazi told David Yallop that during this time many of his organs were illegally removed from his body.

No inquiry was made into the death and the Tarazi family were told if they continued to ask for an inquiry they would be looking for trouble. Five months later soldiers and secret police visited the Tarazi house at midnight, beat up Khader’s brother and father and threw the former into Ansar Three prison.

Yallop is also the source for the following:

West Bank, 30th of October, 1988

When Roman Catholic Palestinians were leaving mass they were confronted by the Israeli Army and began throwing stones. Nineteen-year old Iyad Bishara Abu Saada was killed by a plastic bullet that cut an abdominal artery. The same grim chase for the body entailed. The mourners eluded the Israelis and Iyad was buried a few hours later. Somewhat predictably the Israelis fired teargas canisters into the family home four days later. Mrs Saada told David Yallop the practice of removing organs was common and named Arab and Israeli hospitals where she said organs were removed. She said doctors, accompanied by soldiers, offered large amounts of money to parents of the killed.

Mary Barrett, identified as a Boston-based photo-journalist (I know nothing else about her) wrote this piece in 1990.

Dr. Abu Ghazalch attributes the widespread anxiety over organ thefts which has gripped Gaza and the West Bank since the intifada began in December of 1987 to several factors. “There are indications that for one reason or another, organs. especially eyes and kidneys, were removed from the bodies during the first year or year and a half’. There were just too many reports by credible people for there to he nothing happening. If someone is shot in the head and comes home in a plastic bag without internal organs, what will people assume’?

The doctor went on to state that there were “fewer incidents which point in that direction” as of 1990. Incidentally, the story mentions Dr. Yehuda Hiss, more recently accused of harvesting organs from fallen Israeli soldiers without permission.

According to a story which was published in Ha’aretz (a source not open to charges of anti-Semitism), Romanian authorities have accused an Israeli adoption agency of being part of a global organ theft conspiracy.

The Romanian Embassy in Israel has asked for, and received from the Labor and Social Affairs Ministry, a list of all children born in Romania who have been brought to Israel for adoption in recent years. The Romanian officials are trying to ascertain if all such children arrived in Israel with all organs in their bodies.

Let’s close with a tale about a willing Palestinian organ donation.

In 2005, in the town of Jenin, the Israeli Defense Forces shot and killed a Palestinian child named Ahmed Khatib. His grieving father allowed the child’s various organs to be used to save the lives of other children, both Jewish and Arab. A generous and humane offer. Nevertheless, the father of a Jewish girl whose life was saved said that he would never allow his daughter to befriend an Arab — for fear of “bad influence.”

(I hope my readers will help draw attention to this story. Normally I do not ask others to link to one of my articles, but in this case I must.)

Uruknet

Link: Cannonfire



Writing this story does not make me feel comfortable. Nevertheless, I must offer a follow-up to my previous post about the FBI’s corruption probe in New Jersey, which netted both corrupt politicians and rabbis who used religious charities as fronts for money laundering.

The most troubling aspect of that story involves the illegal trade in human organs. Using responsible sources, my post demonstrated that this organ ring involved unwilling donors, major hospitals, and the Israeli government itself. Alas, no-one has followed up on the leads I have provided.

The key figure in the probe was an FBI informant named Solomon Dweck, the son of a prominent rabbi in Deal, New Jersey. Charged with trying to pass $50 millionin bad checks (!!!), Dweck cooperated the FBI in order to obtain leniency.

Dweck’s criminality — and the even worse criminality of the figures he helped bring to justice — should not reflect upon the larger Orthodox Jewish community in New Jersey. But the reaction of that community is troubling.

Troubling and, to be frank, disgusting.

The Orthodox news organ VIN had offered an incorrect story, based on Israeli sources, that Rabbi Isaac Dweck had announced in public that he was sitting shiva for his son Solomon. (“Sitting shiva” means treating his son as if he were dead.) The rabbi denounced his son not because of the $50 million bank fraud, but because Solomon had informed on other Jews.

A later, corrected account revealed that the rabbi did not sit shiva. Nevertheless…

Rabbi Dweck delivered a very emotional sermon in which he strongly denounced the phenomenon of a Jew informing on other Jews, said that he is also a victim in this saga together with Klal Yisroel, and asked for prayers from the entire Jewish community for his terrible suffering.

Again: Solomon tried to pass $50 million in bad checks. Yet this rabbi — a religious leader! — offered not a syllable of sorrow about that crime. Instead, he denounced his own son for doing the right thing — helping to bring money launderers and organ thieves to justice.

The responses from VIN readers are even more disturbing:

Whatever the halacha is, what he did is disgraceful.

he should sit shivah

one should sit shiva for such a son; his son deserves death, so its as if he died

why wouldn’t the father sit shivah? don’t his son’s action prompt him to cut off ties with him? would his father ever look at him again?

Trust me rabbi dweck knows how disgracefull it is to go after rabbi kassin and trying to get rabbi d yosef too. Does anyone have a clue to how painfull it is to denounce a son in public?

the fact is, the rabbanim were entrapped by shlomo dwek.

dwek, on the other hand, was in trouble. instead of doing his time like a mentsch for the INSANE acts he is known to have committed (keep in mind 3 years have passed since), as his business partner sat the past 3 years and has recently completed his sentence and began a fresh slate with his family and a new job, NO – mr. dwek instead decided to be a moser – a crime for which the chofetz chaim states there is NO kapara – unlike chillul hashem, for which death atones, a moser will continue to burn even after the fuel in gehenom runs out!

“Moser” means “snitch.” “Kapara” means forgiveness. “Chillul hashem” means any act which profanes God’s name.

Moiser is worse, and especially the way he did it with entrapment and bait. this piece if dirt.

FBI and this lowlife,shame on you.That is the real chillul hashem.If Rosenbaum is such a bad guy,organ seller and all,why do they have zero real cases on him.The FBI has been following him for awhile and all they have is one case where he alledgedly conspired to do the act.

He should sit shiva his son is a moser and lost his cheluk to Olam Haba.

how did the press get pictures of the arrest if the FBI didnt turn it into a media circus/setup

I should quickly point out that some VIN readers reacted much more responsibly, denouncing the corruption at the heart of this scandal. Still, it is troubling to see so many members of this community speak as though Dweck’s true crime was ratting out other Jews.

This denunciation of informants might be understandable if we were dealing with members of the IRA during the days of British rule. Does the Jewish community of New Jersey really feel that the United States government is an alien, occupying force?

The FBI acted well within its mandate. Indeed, the feds deserve to be castigated only for not acting earlier on the leads provided by Nancy Scheper-Hughes, whose investigations into the illegal organ trade have lead to arrests and convictions in other countries.

Why does the spectacle of rabbis arrested on charges of criminal conspiracy evince so few expressions of shock and shame from this community? Why aren’t these people disgusted by Isaac Rosenbaum, who (according to Scheper-Hughes) forced organ donations at gunpoint? Why denounce the moser and not the monsters?

Source

Swedish PM: No apology to Israel in regards to article Swedish newspaper reveals Israeli army murders Palestinians for their organs

U.S. group invests tax-free millions in East Jerusalem land

Gaza cancer patients have only painkillers, due to Israeli Blockade

Swedish newspaper reveals Israeli army murders Palestinians for their organs

Swedish PM: No apology to Israel in regards to article Swedish newspaper reveals Israeli army murders Palestinians for their organs

Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt

August 23, 2009
The Swedish prime minister says his country will not apologize for an article in a Swedish newspaper accusing Israel of killing Palestinians to plunder their organs.

“No one can demand that the Swedish government violates its own constitution. Freedom of speech is an indispensable part of Swedish society,” Fredrik Reinfeldt was quoted as telling the Swedish news agency TT on Saturday.

Swedish top diplomat has also ruled out any plan to apologize to Israel.

“The government does not review individual articles or what is published in the press. That is not our task,” Foreign Minister Carl Bildt told Swedish radio news.

In an article titled “They plunder the organs of our sons”, the daily Aftonbladet said Israeli soldiers abduct young Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza Strip and return their bodies to their families after removing their organs.

“Our sons are used as involuntary organ donors,” relatives of Khalid a Palestinian man from Nablus told Donald Bostrom who authored the report, which was published on Aug. 17.

Bostrom has told Press TV that an international war crimes investigation awaits Israel over its soldiers’ harvest of organs from dead Palestinians.

The freelance journalist underscored that the International Court of Justice — the principal judicial body of the United Nations — will likely investigate the report.

Source
And we don’t want anyone in their digging out the truth now do we?

Israel delays press credentials for Sweden team

August 23 2009

Israel denies press credentials for the Swedish daily Aftonbladet amid a row over an article accusing Israeli troops of involvement in an organ theft scandal.

The newspaper published They plunder the organs of our sons last Tuesday, suggesting that the Israeli army kidnapped and killed young Palestinians to harvest their organs.

The article, authored by freelance journalist Donald Bostrom, sparked outrage among Israeli officials who immediately called on Sweden to condemn the report.

The Swedish Embassy in Tel Aviv called the report “appalling,” but Sweden’s Foreign Ministry refused to condemn it, saying the country has a “free press.”

Now two journalists for the Scandinavian daily will have to wait for Israeli press credentials, CNN reported.

The reporter and cameraman from Aftonbladet were told Sunday when they applied for press accreditation that the process could take up to 90 days and that the newspaper’s decision to run the organ harvesting article last week will be taken into consideration when the request is considered.

“We have no duty to supply them with press cards immediately; we have 90 days to decide about their status,” said Danny Seaman, the head of Israel’s press office.

Meanwhile, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called on the Swedish government to condemn the article.

“We’re not asking the Swedish government for an apology, we’re asking for their condemnation,” an official – speaking on condition of anonymity – quoted Netanyahu as saying.

Typical behavior of Israel. They also block all reporters during the war on Gaza as well. Can’t let anyone find out the truth. If they are blocking reporters you bet your ass they have something to hide.
Israeli soldiers and Israel itself are responsible for many horrible atrocities against the Palestinians.  This is just one more.
Israel has never treated the Palestinians with any respect whatsoever.
Israel has never apologized to anyone so why should anyone apoligise to them for enlightening people.
Israel attempts to manipulate foreign media and countries to support their terrorizing the Palestinians.
Those who support Israel should be taking a good, long,  hard look in the Mirror.
From the conception if Israel in the Middle East there has been war,  “Caused by Israel”.
Congratulations to Sweden for standing up for the Free Press and Justice. It is a rare thing indeed to see any country honestly stand up against Israel.
Other countries whimper and whine and buckle to Israels wishes.
They swallow the lies Israel spreads and support Israels atrosities against the Palestinians.
US  one of main offenders.
Any country who supports Israel should hang their head in shame.
The International Court of Justice should launch an investigation. A crime has been committed by Israel yet again.  One of many.
Criminals should not be allowed to go free.
One has to wonder WHY Israel gets so much support.
Their country should also be opened up to Weapons Inspectors as well.

Lest we forget what they did…… Gaza (1): A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words

U.S. group invests tax-free millions in East Jerusalem land

Gaza cancer patients have only painkillers, due to Israeli Blockade

Swedish newspaper reveals Israeli army murders Palestinians for their organs

A little history from January 2009 Index

Father: ‘I watched an Israeli soldier shoot dead my two little girls’

Interview: Adam Shapiro, co-founder of the ISM/UN Reports Gaza/ US Aid to Israel

Spain: Judicial probe looks at 2002 Gaza War Crimes Claims

Letting AP in on the Secret: Israeli Strip Searches are Torture

Why Americans get a distorted View of the Conflict between Israel and Palestinians

Gaza detainee treatment ‘inhuman’

Israeli troops fire warning shots at European diplomats

Israel Broke Ceasefire From Day One

Illegal Israeli settlement construction in the West Bank increased sharply in 2008

Aid Workers Protest Restricted Access to Gaza

Israeli aircraft strike Gaza Tunnels-Residents Again

Army rabbi ‘gave out hate leaflet to troops’,Israel: ’We Could Destroy All European Capitals’

Public gives £600,000 to Gaza appeal before broadcasts are aired/Information, If you want to Donate

Information Wanted by the International Criminal Court/ UN: Falk Likens Gaza to Warsaw Ghetto

This is just a couple of stories. There are many more.

Indexed List of all Stories in Archives

Published in: on August 23, 2009 at 7:01 pm  Comments Off  
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

U.S. group invests tax-free millions in East Jerusalem land

American Friends of Ateret Cohanim, a nonprofit organization that sends millions of shekels worth of donations to Israel every year for clearly political purposes, such as buying Arab properties in East Jerusalem, is registered in the United States as an organization that funds educational institutes in Israel.

The U.S. tax code enables nonprofits to receive tax-exempt status if they engage in educational, charitable, religious or scientific activity. However, such organizations are forbidden to engage in any political activity. The latter is broadly defined as any action, even the promotion of certain ideas, that could have a political impact.

Financing land purchases in East Jerusalem would, therefore, seem to violate the organization’s tax-exempt status.

Daniel Luria, chief fund-raiser for Ateret Cohanim in Israel, told Haaretz Sunday that the American organization’s registration as an educational entity stemmed from tax considerations.

“We are an umbrella organization that engages in redeeming land,” he said. “Our [fund-raising] activity in New York goes solely toward land redemption.”

Although Ateret Cohanim also operates a yeshiva, Ateret Yerushalayim, in the Muslim Quarter of Jerusalem’s Old City, fund-raising for the yeshiva is handled by a different organization: American Friends of Yeshivat Ateret Yerushalayim.”

American Friends of Ateret Cohanim was founded in New York in 1987. Like all tax-exempt organizations, it must file detailed annual returns with the U.S. Internal Revenue Service. An examination of them reveals that the organization describes its “primary exempt purpose” as: “[to] provide funding for higher educational institutes in Israel.”

“That’s because of the tax issue,” Luria said, explaining that due to American law, the American Friends organization “has to be connected in some fashion with educational matters.”

He also estimated that 60 percent of Ateret Cohanim’s money is raised in the U.S.

The Friends organization’s most recent return, filed in 2008 for fiscal 2007, shows that it raised $2.1 million in donations that year. Of this, $1.6 million was transferred to Ateret Cohanim in Israel.

The remainder was used to cover administrative overhead, including fund-raising expenses and an $80,000 salary for Shoshana Hikind, the American organization’s vice president and de facto director, whose husband Dov is a New York state assemblyman and well-known supporter of the Israeli right.

The organization also raised substantial sums in previous years: $1.3 million in 2006, $900,000 in 2005 and about $2 million in 2004.

By comparison, American Friends of Yeshivat Ateret Yerushalayim raised only $189,000 in 2007.

In its IRS returns, American Friends of Ateret Cohanim said its purpose is to “promote,” “publicize” and “raise funds for” Ateret Cohanim institutions in Israel. These institutions, it continued, “encourage and promote study and observance of Jewish religious traditions and culture.”

In reality, Ateret Cohanim in Israel focuses mainly on purchasing Arab property in East Jerusalem. Since its founding in the 1970s, it has bought dozens of Arab buildings for Jews to reside in. Just this April, for instance, it moved Jewish families into an Arab house it purchased in the Muslim Quarter.

One noteworthy donor to its Friends organization is casino magnate Irving Moskowitz, a well-known supporter of rightist causes, who also owns the Shepherd Hotel in East Jerusalem. That hotel made headlines recently when Moskowitz obtained a permit to build 20 apartments for Jews there, sparking angry protests from the U.S. government.

In response, Ateret Cohanim chairman Mati Dan insisted that the Friends organization “is an independent organization that decides for itself whom to fund.” Moreover, he added, “we engage in education constantly … I don’t know what Daniel Luria told you, but we are active in the field of [educational] institutions.”

As of press time, no comment had been obtained from the Friends organization.

Source

If this is what they are doing they are raising money under false pretenses and this would also constitute Fraud. They should be investigated and charges should be laid. They should also lose their tax free statues as well.  They are defrauding those who donate money..

Gaza cancer patients have only painkillers, due to Israeli Blockade

Swedish newspaper reveals Israeli army murders Palestinians for their organs

Indexed List of all Stories in Archives

Published in: on August 22, 2009 at 4:48 am  Comments Off  
Tags: , , , ,

Gaza cancer patients have only painkillers, due to Israeli Blockade

Gaza_cancer_patient

And Israel’s appeasers continue to turn a blind eye…

Israeli-besieged Gaza cancer patients have only painkillers

Palestinians dying as Israel prevents 500 tons of donations of medical equipment to enter Gaza.
GAZA CITY – Arafat Hamdona, 20, has been confined to the cancer unit of As-Shifa, Gaza’s primary hospital, since he was diagnosed with maxillary skin tumours in June 2008. Red lesions protrude from his face, his features are distorted and his eyes swollen shut.

In April, Arafat was permitted to travel to Augusta Victoria Hospital in East Jerusalem where he received three series of chemotherapy and radiotherapy treatment. He was scheduled to return for further treatment, but has not been granted permission by the Israeli authorities to leave Gaza.
“He is only given pain killers,” said Arafat’s father, Faraj Hamdona, explaining that that is all As-Shifa has to offer.

According to a July 2009 report published by the World Health Organization (WHO) in Jerusalem, Gaza doctors and nurses do not have the medical equipment to respond to the health needs of the 1.5 million people living in the Gaza Strip.
Medical equipment is often broken, lacking spare parts, or outdated.

WHO attributes the dismal state of Gaza’s healthcare system to the Israeli blockade of the territory, tightened in June 2007 after Hamas seized control. The poor organization of maintenance services in Gaza compounds the problem, reports WHO.

Medical equipment sits idle

Some 500 tons of donations of medical equipment which flooded the Strip after Israel’s military offensive ended on 18 January sits idle in warehouses. Few donors consulted the health ministry or aid agencies working in Gaza to find out what provisions were needed. According to the health ministry, 20 percent of the donated medications had expired. WHO said much of the equipment sent was old and unusable due to a lack of spare parts.
WHO also said suppliers were unable to access medical equipment for repairs and maintenance and “since 2000, maintenance staff and clinical workers have not been able to leave the Strip for training in the use of medical devices”.

The Israeli Defence Ministry says it is not obliged to allow into Gaza anything other than basic humanitarian supplies necessary for survival, and is concerned certain medical technology could be used for other more sinister means. Gaza’s only other connection to the outside world is its border crossing with Egypt, which is closed most of the time.

The lack of proper medical care in Gaza can have dire consequences.

“The largest number of deaths due to the siege is among cancer patients,” Gaza deputy health minister Hassan Halifa said. “Radiotherapy for cancer patients is not available due to the lack of equipment, and chemotherapy is generally not available due to the lack of drugs.”

Lack of drugs, medical supplies

In July, 77 out of 480 essential drugs and 140 out of 700 essential medical supplies in Gaza’s health ministry were out of stock, according to WHO.

Ismail Ahmed, a 66-year-old from Shujayah, also lies in the cancer unit of As-Shifa, with a catheter for urination flowing into a wastebasket.

“We lack necessary equipment for the patients,” Abdullah Farajullah, a nurse at the unit, said.

Suffering from bladder cancer, Ismail requires blood transfusions.
“There are not enough IV [intravenous] bags. The nurses put blood into plastic water bottles to transfer into my IV bag,” Ismail said.

Due to a lack of equipment, he has been on a waiting list for over a month to have a CT (computed tomography) scan, and requires an MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) – although Gaza lacks a single working MRI scanner, according to WHO.

As-Shifa lacks equipment for basic blood tests. Patients rely on family members to take their blood to certain clinics for testing.

Limited electricity

Another problem for medics in Gaza is the irregular electricity supply, which affects sensitive medical equipment such as incubators and kidney dialysis machines.

Hospitals in Gaza use uninterruptable power supply (UPS) systems as backups, but they require batteries which are often not available due to border closures with Israel and Egypt, according to WHO.

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) is funding and supplying 30 percent of medications and medical supplies in Gaza, said communications officer Mustafa Abu-Hassanain in Gaza.

“Most of the other 70 percent comes from the health ministry in Ramallah, paid for by the Palestinian Authority budget,” said Tony Laurance, head of WHO’s West Bank and Gaza Office in Jerusalem.

There is a dialogue between the health ministry in Gaza and the ministry in Ramallah (under Fatah’s control). Deliveries must be approved by the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT), a unit of the Israeli Ministry of Defence, before being allowed into Gaza, explained Laurance.

Source

No one can say this isn’t Genocide.

Swedish newspaper reveals Israeli army murders Palestinians for their organs

Indexed List of all Stories in Archives

Swedish newspaper reveals Israeli army murders Palestinians for their organs

August 20 2009

DataFiles_Cache_TempImgs_2009_2_images_News_2009_08_20_organ-harvesting_300_0

From Khalid Amayreh

OCCUPIED EAST JERUSALEM – Israeli officials and spokespersons have been railing against a leading Swedish newspaper for publishing a report claiming that the Israeli occupation army murders Palestinians in order to use their organs for transplants for Jewish patients.

The Tabloid Aftonbladet, one of Sweden’s most popular newspapers, on Tuesday, 18 August, reported that Israeli occupation soldiers had been murdering Palestinian youngsters in the West Bank in order to extricate their organs and sell them. The report carried a photograph showing the body of a victim of such an execution, with a large scar running from his chin to abdomen.

The report quotes the family of one of the victims as saying that “our sons were plundered from their organs.” The report also makes a connection with the recent corruption scandal in New Jersey involving elected officials, rabbis, and illegal organ trading.

The author of the report, Donald Bostrom, spoke of a strong suspicion among Palestinians that young men’s organs were harvested by the Israeli army. He suggests that the International Court of Justice in the Hague should open an investigation into the matter.

Witness

Bostrom quotes a Palestinian witness as describing one case in which the Israeli occupation army shot dead a young Palestinian from a West Bank village and then extricated his organs.  The Palestinian victim is identified as Bilal Ahmed Ghniyan.

“He was taken away by a military helicopter and brought back by the army five days later, dead. As his family members buried him, they saw a large scar running from his stomach to his chin.”

Bostrom also quotes other eye-witnesses testifying that their sons were used as “forced organ donors.”

“Blood libel”

Israeli spokesperson and Foreign Ministry officials were raving and ranting against Aftonbladet  accusing the mass circulation newspaper of indulging in “blood libel” and making “canards” against Israel .

Israeli spokesman Yigal Palmor said the Swedish newspaper had “turned the demonization of Israel into a sacred cause.”

Other Israeli officials threatened to sue the Swedish newspaper for libel, claiming that the report was an expression of anti-Semitism.

Israel has been  reacting with exaggerated sensitivity toward international criticisms of its manifestly harsh treatment of Palestinians and the brazen racism associated with this treatment.

Earlier this year, the Israeli army, using internationally-banned weapons launched a massive and deadly blitzkrieg on the virtually unprotected population of the Gaza Strip, killing, maiming and incinerating thousands of innocent civilians, including hundreds of children.

Human rights organizations described the huge  rampage of terror and death, which lasted for more than 20 days,  as “clear war crimes” and “crimes against humanity.”

Similarly, Israel had killed thousands of innocent civilians in the West Bank , and many of the victims were sent to the Abu Kabir forensic institute for autopsy operations.

However, it is unclear if the vital organs of these young victims were always  disposed of or taken out for transplant in Jewish patients.

The Israeli army, which exerts huge political and legal influence in Israel, nearly always resisted scrutiny of its operations in the West Bank which are carried out in utter violation of international law, especially the international humanitarian law.

Precedent

In January, 2002, an Israeli cabinet minister tacitly admitted that organs taken from the bodies of Palestinian victims might have been used for transplants in Jewish patients without the knowledge of the Palestinian  victims’ families.

The minister, Nessim Dahan, said in response to a question by an Arab Knesset member that he couldn’t deny or confirm  that organs of Palestinian youths and children killed by the Israeli army were taken out for transplants or scientific research.

“I couldn’t say for sure that something like that didn’t happen.”

The Arab Knesset member who posed the question to Dahan is believed to be Ahmed Teibi. Teibi pointed out that he had received “credible evidence” proving that Israeli doctors at the forensic institute of Abu Kabir extracted such vital organs as the heart, kidneys, and liver from the bodies of Palestinian youth and children killed by the Israeli army in Gaza and the West Bank .

During an interview with al-Jazeera TV in 2002,  the late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat  accused the Israeli apartheid regime of murdering Palestinian infants, children, and youths and harvesting their vital organs for transplants.

“They murder our kids and use their organs as spare parts` Why is the whole world silent? Israel takes advantage of this silence to escalate it’s oppression and terror against our people,” said an angry President Arafat.

During the interview, which took place on 14 January, 2002,   Arafat held up photos of the mutilated bodies of the children.

“I’m not worried about myself”, as the President is under house arrest, “I’m worried about the Palestinian people who have been under siege for the past 15 months.”

Israel had  admitted that doctors at the L. Greenberg Institute of Forensic Medicine at Abu Kabir had harvested the organs of 3 Palestinian youth killed by the Israeli army near Khan Younis.

After 10 days the bodies of the three victims  were returned to their families for burial but with their organs and even their eyes removed.

Israel never carried out a serious investigation into this and other incidents involving the extrication of vital organs from the body of Palestinian victims killed by the Israeli occupation forces.

According to reporter Saira Soufan,  the illegal harvesting of the organs of Palestinian soldiers and freedom fighters has been documented since before the 1990′s.

“Upon return of the soldiers’ bodies to their mourning families, the pillage of body parts is discovered during the burial process.

“ The empty cavities have been filled with garbage such as cotton wool, garden hoses, and broomsticks, then sewn up as a result of a so-called  ‘autopsy.’”

Occasionally, Israeli authorities steal body organs from the bodies of tourists who die in Israel .

An  unpublicized instance occurred  in 1998,  when a Scotsman, Alistair Sinclair, died under mysterious circumstances in the Ben-Gurion Airport lockup.

Mr. Sinclair’s parents sued the Israeli authorities  upon finding that  their son’s heart and other organs missing. A replacement heart and organs were sent to his mother, who didn’t  believe that these were those of her son’s.

Source

Mores stories and pictures about Gaza in the Archives.

Indexed List of all Stories in Archives

US Air Force Program: Marine Mammals and Other Sea Life to be Decimated

by Rosalind Peterson

August 16 2009

The United States Navy will be decimating millions of marine mammals and other aquatic life, each year, for the next five years, under their Warfare Testing Range Complex Expansions in the Atlantic, Pacific, and the Gulf of Mexico. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS under NOAA), has already approved the “taking” of marine mammals in more than a dozen Navy Range Warfare Testing Complexes (6), and is preparing to issue another permit for 11.7 millions marine mammals (32 Separate Species), to be decimated along the Northern, California, Oregon and Washington areas of the Pacific Ocean (7).U.S. Department of Commerce – NOAA (NMFS) Definition: “TAKE” Defined under the MMPA as “harass, hunt, capture, kill or collect, or attempt to harass, hunt, capture, kill or collect.” Defined under the ESA as “to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct.” Definition: Incidental Taking: An unintentional, but not unexpected taking (12).

The total number of marine mammals that will be decimated in the Atlantic, Pacific and the Gulf of Mexico for the next five years is unknown. The NMFS approvals will have a devastating impact upon the marine mammal populations worldwide and this last Navy permit, which is expected to be issued in February 2010, for the “taking” of more than 11.7 million marine mammals in the Pacific will be the final nail in the coffin for any healthy populations of sea life to survive.
Now with ever-increasing numbers of permits being issued for sonar programs in more than twelve ranges in the Pacific, Gulf of Mexico, and the Atlantic regions of the United States, our marine mammals and other sea life are facing complete devastation. When you add bomb blasts to this list, warfare testing of all types, future war testing practice, and the toxic chemicals which are both airborne and to be used underwater, there is little chance that most marine life will survive in any significant numbers. Our U.S. Senators and U.S. Congressmen refuse to postpone these disastrous “takings” or hold U.S. Congressional Hearings while pretending to be ocean environment friendly in their re-election speeches.

Earlier this year, June 8th through June 16, 2009, a delegation from Connecticut and California spent time walking the halls of the U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives. We left petitions, color fliers, and information about saving our marine mammals, requested a postponement and U.S. Congressional Hearings. Ninety-nine senate offices were visited and 2/3 of offices in the U.S. House of Representatives. The silent response from our elected officials regarding these two requests has been zero…one U.S. Congressman even stated that citizens would be “laughed out of the halls of the U.S. Congress for suggesting that we protect our marine mammals”. Corporate paid “Lobbyists”, who hand out money by the $Millions, on the other hand, are always accepted at hearings, give testimony, and are welcomed in the halls of Congress…apparently the voices of citizens of the United States are not given the same status.

These virtually unregulated Navy Warfare Testing Programs already approved are now taking a toll on marine mammals, the fishing and ocean tourism industries, and on all aquatic life. Many U.S. Senators and Congressmen are ignoring these issues by pretending that they doesn’t exist even though they have been informed in advance of these programs.

A brief history of the Navy Warfare Testing Program is needed to understand the full implications of this Pentagon/Navy Warfare Testing Program. In 2004, the Bush Administration signed a bill weakening U.S. Environmental Laws (1), with regard to the U.S. Navy. And then in 2008, President Bush signed an executive order allowing the Navy to be exempt from environmental laws which protects endangered and threatened species (2-4). The Navy Southern California Complex was the first one to benefit from this executive order. Soon other Navy Range Complexes were obtaining exemptions from the NMFS with little or no oversight or significant mitigation measures (5).

A partial listing of known Navy Range Complexes (6), shows the amazing scope of the disaster. According to U.S. Congressman Waxman in a letter dated March 12, 2009: “…The Navy estimates that its sonar training activities will “take” marine mammals more than 11.7 million times over the course of a five-year permit…The sonar exercises at issue would take place off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, Hawaii, Alaska and in the Gulf of Mexico – affecting literally every coastal state. In many regions, the Navy plans to increase the number of training exercises or expand the areas in which they may occur. Of particular concern are biologically sensitive marine habitats off our coasts, such as National Marine Sanctuary and other breeding habitats…In all, the Navy anticipates that its sonar exercises will “take” marine mammals more than 2.3 million times per year, or 11.7 million times over the course of a 5-year permit….” This statement was made in response to public inquiries regarding the Navy Northwest Training Range schedule for Northern California, Oregon, Washington, and Idaho.

KTVU Oakland San Francisco Television Station is the only television station to investigate and air a story about this U.S. Navy program (13), on May 18, 2009. It took a great deal of courage, in the face of the fact that no other major television networks would carry this story. A few courageous radio stations are also helping to get the word out to the public.

Published in the United States Federal Register on March 11, 2009:

The United States Navy published an application, as an addendum to their expanded Warfare Testing program, in the U.S. Federal Register, dated March 11, 2009. This application from the Navy “…requests authorization to take individuals of 32 species of marine mammals during upcoming Navy Warfare testing and training to be conducted in the NWTR areas (off the Pacific coasts of Washington, Oregon, and northern California) over the course of 5 years…”

The Navy Warfare Testing Program will “…utilize mid- and high frequency active sonar sources and explosive detonations. These sonar and explosive sources will be utilized during Antisubmarine Warfare (ASW) Tracking Exercises, Mine Avoidance Training, Extended Echo Ranging and Improved Extended Echo Ranging (EER/IEER) events, Missile Exercises, Gunnery Exercises, Bombing Exercises, Sinking Exercises, and Mine Warfare Training…” (More listed in Navy E.I.S.)

The “taking” of marine mammals negatively impacts the entire ecology of our oceans and the life in them which feeds large numbers of people and other species around the world. It should be noted that the list of toxic chemicals that the Navy proposes to use is a long one as noted in the Navy E.I.S. Depleted uranium, red and white phosphorus, mercury, lead, and a whole host of chemicals known to be toxic not only to man, but to marine life, are being served up on the “Navy Warfare Chemical Menu” that will contaminate our air, water, and soil.

Since all of the Navy Warfare Training Range Complexes have received, or will receive in the near future, permits to “take” marine mammals during their respective 5-year warfare training programs the cumulative and synergistic effects of losing millions of marine mammals will be disastrous. It is time to say no to any future permits being issued by the National Marine Fisheries Services. Please feel free to file protests by the August 12, 2009, deadline National Marine Fisheries Service (9), regarding the U.S. Navy Environmental Impact Statement (10).

On May 28, 2009, U.S. Congressman Mike Thompson from California, in a Press Release to NOAA, made the following statements which could be directed toward any ocean Navy testing range:

“…I am concerned about the United States Navy’s ability to properly review the environmental impacts of proposed enhancements in its Northwest Training Range Complex (NWTRC)… I am particularly concerned that NOAA’s existing mitigation measures may not be best suited for the protected marine mammals and endangered salmonids present in the Pacific Northwest… I am also concerned about proposed changes to current levels of activity in the NWTRC that focus on training for new aircraft and ship classes and physical enhancements to the training range. The Navy’s Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) acknowledges that these changes, particularly those related to its increased use of mid-frequency sonar, are likely to have measurable impacts on 32 protected marine mammal species known to inhabit the NWTRC…”

Congressman Thompson continues: “…As the Navy moves forward with plans to train on new weapons systems, it is essential that NOAA identifies the environmental impacts of these new aircraft, ships and submarines – and their accompanying mitigation measures – specifically with reference to the productive ocean habitats and species that define the Pacific Coast… I am not aware of any specific elements included in the evaluation and am concerned that the review will be inadequate to address the Navy’s EIS with respect to protection of Pacific Coast ocean ecosystems.

NOAA’s comprehensive review is particularly important given that the Navy has estimated shipboard visual monitoring for marine mammals – the most commonly employed sonar mitigation measure – to be effective only 9% of the time.

It is important that NOAA take immediate steps to validate its comprehensive review of mitigation measures. Specifically, I request that you provide my office with an outline of the comprehensive review process and answers to the following questions:

1. What mitigation measures will be reviewed during NOAA’s process?

2.
What data will NOAA use to identify those mitigation measures best able to protect marine species?

3.
How will your agency’s recommendations target specific species, habitats or training activities of concern?

4.
How will NOAA’s recommendations address sonar impacts to species other than marine mammals?

5.
How will NOAA or the Navy establish performance standards to ensure that recommended mitigation measures are functioning as intended?…”

The public should also be informed of any information received by Congressman Thompson’s office. In addition, there are a few more questions which need to be answered:

1. What are the synergistic and cumulative effects of all the permits that have been issued in the last two years to Naval Range Complex requests?

2. Bomb blasts and toxic chemicals are also being tested by the Navy and NOAA reviews are not including information on the Navy Hazardous Waste and Toxic Chemicals sections of the Navy E.I.S., such as bioaccumulation of chemicals in the food chain, death from exposure to toxic chemicals and bomb blasts.

3. The Navy will also be conducting classified future warfare testing. Since the public is not to be informed of those tests, chemicals being used, electromagnetic weapons systems, and other air or land based tests, who is protecting sea life, human health, water, soil, and air from pollution and other experimental tests?

4. Human health from airborne pollutants, toxic debris, and shoreline contamination from toxic chemicals should also be considered in the NMFS evaluation. The protection of cruise ships, fishermen, ocean tourists, U.S. Coastguard personnel, and the public who swim in the ocean should also be considered in their evaluations. This is not just a marine mammal issue.

It is now time for all of us to weigh in with regard to these warfare programs which will devastate our marine mammals, pollute our air and water, and have negative impacts on human health. We should have U.S. Congressional Hearings and a postponement of these programs until such time as the public can be informed about these issues.

Website: californiaskywatch.com
Website: agriculturedefensecoalition.org

Source

US Recruits Death Squads

US Recruits Death Squads

C.I.A. Sought Blackwater’s Help in Plan to Kill Jihadists

By Mark Mazzett

August 19, 2009

WASHINGTON

The Central Intelligence Agency in 2004 hired outside contractors from the private security contractor Backwater USA as part of a secret program to locate and assassinate top operatives of Al Qaeda, according to current and former government officials.

Executives from Blackwater, which has generated controversy because of its aggressive tactics in Iraq, helped the spy agency with planning, training and surveillance. The C.I.A. spent several million dollars on which did not successfully capture or kill any terrorist suspects.

The fact that the C.I.A. used an outside company for the program was a major reason that Leon E. Panetta, the C.I.A.’s director, became alarmed and called an emergency meeting in June to tell Congress that the agency had withheld details of the program for seven years, the officials said.

Officials said the C.I.A. did not have a formal contract with Blackwater for this program but instead had individual agreements with top company officials, including the founder, Erik D. Prince, a politically connected former member of the Navy Seals and the heir to a family fortune. Blackwater’s work on the program actually ended years before Mr. Panetta took over the agency, after senior C.I.A. officials themselves questioned the wisdom of using outsiders in a targeted killing program.
Blackwater, which has changed its name, most recently to Xe Services, and is based in North Carolina, in recent years has received millions of dollars in government contracts, growing so large that the Bush administration said it was a necessary part of its war operation in Iraq.

It has also drawn controversy. Blackwater employees hired to guard American diplomats in Iraq were accused of using excessive force on several occasions, including shootings in Baghdad in 2007 in which 17 civilians were killed. Iraqi officials have since refused to give the company an operating license.

Several current and former government officials interviewed for this article spoke only on the condition of anonymity because they were discussing details of a still classified program.
Paul Gimigliano, a C.I.A. spokesman, declined to provide details about the canceled program, but he said that Mr. Panetta’s decision on the assassination program was “clear and straightforward.”

“Director Panetta thought this effort should be briefed to Congress, and he did so,” Mr. Gimigliano said. “He also knew it hadn’t been successful, so he ended it.”

A Xe spokeswoman did not return calls seeking comment.

Senator Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat who leads the Senate Intelligence Committee, also declined to give details of the program. But she praised Mr. Panetta for notifying Congress. “It is too easy to contract out work that you don’t want to accept responsibility for,” she said.

The C.I.A. this summer conducted an internal review of the assassination program that recently was presented to the White House and the Congressional intelligence committees. The officials said that the review stated that Mr. Panetta’s predecessors did not believe that they needed to tell Congress because the program was not far enough developed.

The House Intelligence Committee is investigating why lawmakers were never told about the program. According to current and former government officials, former Vice President Dick Cheney told C.I.A. officers in 2002 that the spy agency did not need to inform Congress because the agency already had legal authority to kill Qaeda leaders.

One official familiar with the matter said that Mr. Panetta did not tell lawmakers that he believed that the C.I.A. had broken the law by withholding details about the program from Congress. Rather, the official said, Mr. Panetta said he believed that the program had moved beyond a planning stage and deserved Congressional scrutiny.

“It’s wrong to think this counterterrorism program was confined to briefing slides or doodles on a cafeteria napkin,” the official said. “It went well beyond that.”
Current and former government officials said that the C.I.A.’s efforts to use paramilitary hit teams to kill Qaeda operatives ran into logistical, legal and diplomatic hurdles almost from the outset. These efforts had been run by the C.I.A.’s counterterrorism center, which runs operations against Al Qaeda and other terrorist networks.

In 2002, Blackwater won a classified contract to provide security for the C.I.A. station in Kabul, Afghanistan, and the company maintains other classified contracts with the C.I.A., current and former officials said.

Over the years, Blackwater has hired several former top C.I.A. officials, including Cofer Black, who ran the C.I.A. counterterrorism center immediately after the Sept. 11 attacks.

C.I.A. operatives also regularly use the company’s training complex in North Carolina. The complex includes a shooting range used for sniper training.

An executive order signed by President Gerald R. Ford in 1976 barred the C.I.A. from carrying out assassinations, a direct response to revelations that the C.I.A. had initiated assassination plots against Fidel Castro of Cuba and other foreign politicians.

The Bush administration took the position that killing members of Al Qaeda, a terrorist group that attacked the United States and has pledged to attack it again, was no different from killing enemy soldiers in battle, and that therefore the agency was not constrained by the assassination ban.

But former intelligence officials said that employing private contractors to help hunt Qaeda operatives would pose significant legal and diplomatic risks, and they might not be protected in the same way government employees are.

Some Congressional Democrats have hinted that the program was just one of many that the Bush administration hid from Congressional scrutiny and have used the episode as a justification to delve deeper into other Bush-era counterterrorism programs.

But Republicans have criticized Mr. Panetta’s decision to cancel the program, saying he created a tempest in a teapot.

“I think there was a little more drama and intrigue than was warranted,” said Representative Peter Hoekstra of Michigan, the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee.

Officials said that the C.I.A. program was devised partly as an alternative to missile strikes using drone aircraft, which have accidentally killed civilians and cannot be used in urban areas where some terrorists hide.

Yet with most top Qaeda operatives believed to be hiding in the remote mountains of Pakistan, the drones have remained the C.I.A.’s weapon of choice. Like the Bush administration, the Obama administration has embraced the drone campaign because it presents a less risky option than sending paramilitary teams into Pakistan.

Source

Published in: on August 20, 2009 at 9:37 pm  Comments Off  
Tags: , , , ,

Obama Embraces Afghanistan, Time for Citizen Opposition to Escalate/End the Afghanistan War!

August 19 2009

Today Afghanistan votes in elections that many view as a fraud. The candidates are all approved by the U.S., there are no political parties, the Taliban cannot run candidates, and the vote takes place under U.S. bayonets. There have reports of the presidential election sparking violence, corruption, vote buying, and alliances between Karzai and war lords.

One Member of Parliament, a woman who is the youngest Member, wrote that Afghans have “no hope” in this election. A fake election will not bring peace and stability.

This weekend President Obama fully embraced the Afghanistan War and has done so at a time when generals and DoD officials are acknowledging the U.S. is losing, deaths are mounting, and that it is going to be a very long haul – measured in years not in months, one general saying four decades.

Those who oppose this war need to organize. We need more people informed about the facts and more people involved in ending the war. Please forward this email to people you know and urge them to take action.

And, take action yourself. Urge President Obama to end the Afghanistan War. The U.S. cannot succeed in the graveyard of Empires and cannot afford to continue this war. Take action at http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/1312/t/9050/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=27796

The Pentagon is spending nearly $5 billion per month in Iraq and Afghanistan, a pace that would bring yearly costs to almost $60 billion.

Military fatalities are consistently rising. And civilian deaths are rapidly rising as the result of drones and air attacks. These deaths are undermining support for the U.S.

Military leaders in both the United States and Britain are saying troops will be needed for years in Afghanistan. State Department officials are describing a lengthy occupation lasting many years. The U.S. is showing its intention by building very large bases in Afghanistan. And there are calls for a vast increase in troops.

The U.S. is repeating mistakes of the Iraq war with very high civilian deaths and abusive prison camps. The Afghan insurgents are winning and holding land. They are a very difficult enemy for U.S. troops. The Taliban is stronger than any time since the war began. Afghanis are increasingly angry with the U.S. presence in their country. In some cases, overcoming Afghan resistance seems insurmountable and the U.S. is considering pulling troops from some regions.

It seems as if the United States can neither define victory nor measure success, nor does it have a clear objective in the Afghan War.

Not only is the Afghan war increasingly unpopular at home with only 41% supporting the war, but throughout the world opposition to the war is increasing. Even soldiers see the war as futile.

The Obama administration is at a critical crossroads regarding Afghanistan policy. Please write the president and urge him to end the Afghanistan War. And, urge everyone you know to do so. Take action at http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/1312/t/9050/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=27796

Source

America’s Most Wanted The Top 50 US War Criminals

Indexed List of all Stories in Archives

America’s Most Wanted The Top 50 US War Criminals

By David Swanson

Compiled below, in hopes that it may be of some assistance to Eric Holder, John Conyers, Patrick Leahy, active citizens, foreign courts, the International Criminal Court, law firms preparing civil suits, and local or state prosecutors with decency and nerve is a list of 50 top living U.S. war criminals. These are men and women who helped to launch wars of aggression or who have been complicit in lesser war crimes. These are not the lowest-ranking employees or troops who managed to stray from official criminal policies. These are the makers of those policies.

The occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan have seen the United States target civilians, journalists, hospitals, and ambulances, use antipersonnel weapons including cluster bombs in densely settled urban areas, use white phosphorous as a weapon, use depleted uranium weapons, employ a new version of napalm found in Mark 77 firebombs, engage in collective punishment of Iraqi civilian populations — including by blocking roads, cutting electricity and water, destroying fuel stations, planting bombs in farm fields, demolishing houses, and plowing down orchards — detain people without charge or legal process without the rights of prisoners of war, imprison children, torture, and murder.

The list below does not include those responsible for war crimes prior to 2001. Nor does it include those currently in power who are making themselves complicit by failing to prosecute or cease commission of these crimes. The list could be greatly expanded. It could also be narrowed. I would argue, however, that it presents a more reasonable starting place than Holder’s reported proposal to investigate only CIA employees who failed to comply with criminal torture policies, of whom there are no doubt more than 50.

Because each of the people on this list should be nonviolently protested everywhere they go (more on that below), I have organized them by location. Please post updates on where they are as comments at http://afterdowningstreet.org/warcriminals

CALIFORNIA

1. John Yoo: Professor of Law at Boalt Hall School of Law in Berkeley, California, with house at 1241 Grizzly Peak Blvd., Berkeley, (but a lawyer with the Pennsylvania bar from which he should be disbarred and would be if enough people demanded it) counseled the White House on how to get away with war crimes, wrote this memo promoting presidential power to launch aggressive war, and claimed the power to decree that the federal statutes against torture, assault, maiming, and stalking do not apply to the military in the conduct of the war, and to announce a new definition of torture limiting it to acts causing intense pain or suffering equivalent to pain associated with serious physical injury so severe that death, organ failure or permanent damage resulting in loss of significant body functions will likely result. Yoo claimed in 2005 that a president has the right to enhance an interrogation by crushing the testicles of someone’s child. Yoo has been confronted in his classroom: video, and defended by the Washington Post, and again confronted in the classroom.

Additional collaborators:
2. Robert J. Delahunty, Yoo colleague, should be disbarred in NY
3. Patrick F. Philbin, Yoo colleague, Deputy, should be disbarred in D.C. and MA

4. Jay Bybee: federal judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, headquartered in San Francisco, California (but Bybee based in Las Vegas), counseled the White House on how to get away with war crimes, including by helping Yoo draft the memo linked above. He signed not only torture memos but also a memo purporting to legalize illegal and unconstitutional wars. BYBEE SHOULD BE IMPEACHED. He works, among other places, at the James R. Browning Courthouse, 95 7th Street, San Francisco, CA 94103, — This is a giant marble building in the center of the city represented in Congress by the Speaker of the House.

5. William J. “Jim” Haynes, II: was General Counsel to the Department of War (“Defense”). He is now Chief Corporate Counsel at the Chevron Corporate Office in San Ramon, California. He counseled the White House on how to get away with war crimes, including by drafting memos for Yoo. Works at Chevron Headquarters, 6001 Bollinger Canyon Road, San Ramon, CA 94583. Member of bar in GA, NC, DC.

More collaborators:
6. Major General (Ret.) Michael E. Dunlavey, (now Judge, Erie County Court, Common Pleas, Erie, PA
7. Diane Beaver, top military lawyer at Gitmo
8. Jack Landman Goldsmith, III, [the illegal transfer memo in March 2004], DoD General Counsel’s Office at Pentagon
9. Ms. Eliana Davidson, International Law Division, Office of the General Counsel, Office of the Secretary of “Defense”

10. Colin Powell: strategic limited partner with Kleiner, Perkins, Caufield & Byers, a Silicon Valley venture capital firm, appears as a speaker in a series of motivational events called Get Motivated, board member of Revolution Health and of the Council on Foreign Relations, took part in White House meetings personally overseeing and approving torture by authorizing the use of specific torture techniques including waterboarding on specific people, lied to the United Nations about the grounds for war in a failed attempt to legalize a war of aggression, and was in fact a leading liar in making the false case for an illegal war of aggression.

Remember: Not every man in a dark suit is a war criminal. Check for blood under their fingernails to confirm identification.

NEW YORK

11. Henry Kissinger: lives in Kent, Connecticut, and works at Kissinger Associates, 350 Park Avenue, New York, N.Y., had a resume envied by other war criminals long before he advised George W. Bush to commit war crimes. Here’s a partial list of his crimes.

12. Nicholas E. Calio: Citigroup’s Executive Vice-President for Global Government Affairs served as a member of the White House Iraq Group (WHIG) which planned the marketing of an illegal war of aggression on the basis of lies.

13. Michael Mukasey: works in New York, N.Y. Some of his crimes are detailed at DisbarTortureLawyers.com.

TEXAS

14. George W. Bush: lives at 10141 Daria Place, Dallas, Texas. His crimes are described at http://afterdowningstreet.org/bush and at War Criminals Watch and at The 13 people who made torture possible.

15. Karen Hughes: lives in Austin, Texas, served as a member of the White House Iraq Group (WHIG) which planned the marketing of an illegal war of aggression on the basis of lies.

16. Paul Bremmer lives in Chester, Vermont, and also works in Austin, Texas. His crimes are listed at War Criminals Watch.

Yes, a woman can be a war criminal. What? Did you think any of the men above ever risked personally breaking a fingernail?

WASHINGTON, D.C.

17. Dick Cheney: The former vice president lives nextdoor to CIA headquarters at 1126 Chain Bridge Road, McLean, Va. His crimes are documented at http://impeachcheney.org and at The 13 people who made torture possible and at War Criminals Watch.

18. John Rizzo: The General Counsel for the CIA (then and now) works nextdoor to Dick Cheney’s house at the headquarters of the CIA in McLean, Va. His crimes are described in The 13 people who made torture possible.

More collaborators:
19. Robert Eatinger, CIA lawyer
20. Steven Hermes, CIA’s National Clandestine Service (NCS)
21. Paul Kelbaugh, Deputy Legal Counsel, CTC, CIA

22. Steven Bradbury: also of McLean, Va., is described along with his crimes at SourceWatch, DisbarTortureLawyers.com, and The 13 people who made torture possible.

23. David Addington: was chief of staff to Dick Cheney in Washington, D.C., counseled the White House on how to get away with war crimes, including by helping Yoo draft the memo linked above, and drafted signing statements for Bush declaring the right to violate laws redundantly banning war crimes including torture and the construction of permanent bases in Iraq and efforts to control Iraq’s oil. Lives at 103 W Maple Street, Alexandria, VA 22301-2605 — This is a few blocks from the King Street Metro Stop.

24. Condoleezza Rice: served as Secretary of State in Washington, D.C., and can be found frequenting shoe stores, served as a member of the White House Iraq Group (WHIG) which planned the marketing of an illegal war of aggression on the basis of lies, took part in White House meetings personally overseeing and approving torture by authorizing the use of specific torture techniques including waterboarding on specific people, lied about mushroom clouds, and was in fact a leading liar in making the false case for an illegal war of aggression. In March 2009, Rice returned to Stanford University as a political science professor and the Thomas and Barbara Stephenson Senior Fellow on Public Policy at the Hoover Institution.

25. Donald Rumsfeld: lives in Washington, D.C., and at former slave-beating plantation “Mount Misery” on Maryland’s Eastern Shore near St. Michael’s and a home belonging to Dick Cheney, as well as at an estate outside Taos, New Mexico. He took part in White House meetings personally overseeing and approving torture by authorizing the use of specific torture techniques including waterboarding on specific people, and was in fact a leading liar in making the false case for an illegal war of aggression, and pushed for wars of aggression for years as a participant in the Project for the New American Century.

26. George Tenet: Distinguished Professor in the Practice of Diplomacy at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C., took part in White House meetings personally overseeing and approving torture by authorizing the use of specific torture techniques including waterboarding on specific people, oversaw the Central Intelligence Agency as it engaged in illegal renditions, detentions, torture, murder, and coverups of crimes, as well as helping to build a false case for an illegal war of aggression.

27. John Ashcroft: has his own lobbying company through which to profit from his government connections: The Ashcroft Group, LLC, 1399 New York Avenue, N.W., Suite 950, Washington, DC 20005, Phone: 202.942.0202, Fax: 202.942.0216, info@ashcroftgroupllc.com took part in White House meetings personally overseeing and approving torture by authorizing the use of specific torture techniques including waterboarding on specific people.

28. Alberto Gonzales: has hired a criminal-defense lawyer George Terwilliger, partner at White & Case, to defend him, while others have created a trust fund to help pay for his legal expenses, meanwhile Gonzales has been unable to find work as a lawyer himself, so his income comes from speaking engagements, then White House counsel, wrote a memo on January 25, 2002. It explained that under the 1996 War Crimes Act, U.S. officials might be prosecuted for violating the Geneva Conventions for actions in Afghanistan (and future parts of the “war on terror”), with penalties up to and including death. He suggested that Bush declare that the Taliban and Al Qaeda weren’t covered by Geneva, to be on the safe side. Bush did so. Gonzo now has a job at Texas Tech, but not teaching law. Help this effort to boot him! Remember that we drove him out of office by almost impeaching him.

29. Paul Wolfowitz: lives in Chevey Chase, Maryland, and is a visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C., advocated illegal war of aggression, and pushed for wars of aggression for years as a participant in the Project for a New American Century.

30. Doug Feith: serves on the faculty of the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C., as a Professor and Distinguished Practitioner in National Security Policy, manufactured, cherry picked, and distorted information, and pressured others to do the same, to help build a false case for an illegal war of aggression, and advocated early and openly for an illegal war of aggression against a “non-al qaeda target.” Also works at Hudson Institute, 1015 15th Street, N.W., 6th Floor, Washington, DC 20005, three blocks from the White House.

31. Elliot Abrams: served as Deputy National Security Advisor for Global Democracy Strategy in Washington, D.C., and wherever he can do the most damage around the world, was a well-established war criminal even before he pushed for wars of aggression for years as a participant in the Project for a New American Century, helped to build a false case for attacking Iraq, and supported a failed coup attempt in Venezuela.

32. Karl Rove: owns million dollar houses in Washington, D.C., and Florida, and works for Fox News, Newsweek, and the Wall Street Journal when not testifying to congressional committees or federal prosecutors about his numerous unindicted non-war crimes. He served as a member of the White House Iraq Group (WHIG) which planned the marketing of an illegal war of aggression on the basis of lies, and took part in exposing an undercover agent as retribution for exposing one of WHIG’s lies.

(According to Star80 at Democratic Underground, Rove “can be found stuffing his fat pasty little face with crab meat at Cafe 30A in Santa Rosa Beach FL: http://www.cafethirtya.com – 3899 East County Highway 30A Santa Rosa Beach FL 32459.”)

(Citizens arrest of Rove attempted in Iowa, and in California, and in New York.)

33. I. Lewis Libby: lives in McLean, Virginia, and has been disbarred in Washington, D.C., and Pennsylvania, served as a member of the White House Iraq Group (WHIG) which planned the marketing of an illegal war of aggression on the basis of lies, took part in exposing an undercover agent as retribution for exposing one of WHIG’s lies, has already been convicted of obstruction of justice for interfering with investigation, and pushed for wars of aggression for years as a participant in the Project for a New American Century.

34. Mary Matalin: married to James Carville, both of them addicted to Washington, D.C., served as a member of the White House Iraq Group (WHIG) which planned the marketing of an illegal war of aggression on the basis of lies.

35. Stephen Hadley: served as National Security Advisor to the President in Washington, D.C., served as a member of the White House Iraq Group (WHIG) which planned the marketing of an illegal war of aggression on the basis of lies, and took part in exposing an undercover agent as retribution for exposing one of WHIG’s lies.

36. James R. Wilkinson: worked for Bush as Deputy National Security Advisor for Communications in Washington, D.C., served as a member of the White House Iraq Group (WHIG) which planned the marketing of an illegal war of aggression on the basis of lies.

37. John Bolton: lives in Bethesda, Maryland, is a member of a Lutheran Church, works for the law firm Kirkland and Ellis LLP, 655 Fifteenth Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005-5793, T: +1 202-879-5000, F: +1 202-879-5200, is associated with the American Enterprise Institute, Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, Institute of East-West Dynamics, National Rifle Association, US Commission on International Religious Freedom, and the Council for National Policy, helped to launch an illegal war of aggression by disseminating false claims through the State Department while he was under-secretary of state for arms control, and pushed for wars of aggression for years as a participant in the Project for a New American Century.

38. Michael Chertoff: works in Washington, D.C. Some of his crimes are detailed at DisbarTortureLawyers.com.

39. Timothy Flanigan: works in Washington, D.C. Some of his crimes are detailed at DisbarTortureLawyers.com.

40. Alice Fisher: works in Washington, D.C. Some of her crimes are detailed at DisbarTortureLawyers.com.

41. John Bellinger works in Washington, D.C. His crimes are listed at War Criminals Watch.

42. John Negroponte works in Washington, D.C. His crimes are listed at War Criminals Watch.

43. Jonathan Fredman was a top torture lawyer under John Rizzo at the CIA: details.

44. Scott Muller was general counsel at the CIA: details.

45. Kyle D. “Dusty” Foggo was instrumental in setting up illegal secret prisons.

NEBRASKA:

46. Andrew Card works in Omaha, NE. His crimes are listed at War Criminals Watch.

AFGHANISTAN:

47. Stanley McChrystal has been promoted as reward for his war crimes.

UNKNOWN LOCATION:

48. James Mitchell:
From The 13 people who made torture possible:

Even while Addington, Gonzales and the lawyers were beginning to build the legal framework for torture, a couple of military psychologists were laying out the techniques the military would use. James Mitchell, a retired military psychologist, had been a leading expert in the military’s SERE program. In December 2001, with his partner, Bruce Jessen, Mitchell reverse-engineered SERE techniques to be used to interrogate detainees. Then, in the spring of 2002, before OLC gave official legal approval to torture, Mitchell oversaw Abu Zubaydah’s interrogation. An FBI agent on the scene describes Mitchell overseeing the use of “borderline torture.” And after OLC approved waterboarding, Mitchell oversaw its use in ways that exceeded the guidelines in the OLC memo. Under Mitchell’s guidance, interrogators used the waterboard with “far greater frequency than initially indicated” — a total of 183 times in a month for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and 83 times in a month for Abu Zubaydah.

More on Mitchell and Jessen.

49. Tommy Franks: His crimes are listed at War Criminals Watch.

50. Michael Hayden: His crimes are listed at War Criminals Watch.

Heck, let’s make it a full deck of 52, by including Bruce Jessen mentioned above and Erik Prince of Blackwater.

***

No Justice, No Peace

Judge’s comment on Rove’s citizen arrest in Iowa: “It’s about time.”

We encourage you to nonviolently protest these people and insist that they be given what so many of them have denied others: a fair trial. We encourage you to attempt to make citizen’s arrests, after consulting lawyers and learning how to avoid any unnecessary criminal risk to yourselves. It is possible to confront a war criminal at a public event and announce a “citizen’s arrest!” without actually touching (or handcuffing) the criminal.

You may want to avoid announcing that you’re coming, because the war criminal may choose to escape.

Your team should include one or more people who can produce an excellent video and be extremely fast in editing and posting it online. Your team should ideally include a lawyer. And, of course, people who can read the charges and question the suspect. Everyone on your team should be able to keep a secret while you’re planning your arrest or protest.

Read the war criminal their rights, rights they have denied others:
“You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to have an attorney present during questioning. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you.”

Read the war criminal the charges against them.

Ask the war criminal if they would like to say anything.

Once you have good video footage, your top priority becomes immediately getting it edited (if necessary) and online.

If possible, turn the war criminal over to the police.

Pass out flyers to passersby.

Send statement to the media and/or have the media present.

Consult a lawyer to avoid unnecessary risks of violating laws while enforcing the law. According to Wikipedia, “A citizen’s arrest is an arrest made by a person who is not a sworn law enforcement official. In common law jurisdictions, the practice dates back to medieval England and the English common law, when sheriffs encouraged ordinary citizens to help apprehend law breakers. Despite the title, the arresting person does not usually have to be a citizen of the country where he is acting, as they are usually designated as any person with arrest powers…. Each state with the exception of North Carolina permits citizen arrests if the commission of felony is witnessed by the arresting citizen… The application of state laws varies widely with respect to … felonies not witnessed by the arresting party. American citizens do not carry the authority or enjoy the legal protections of police, and are held to the principle of strict liability before the courts of civil- and criminal law including but not limited to any infringement of another’s rights. Though North Carolina General Statutes have no provision for citizen’s arrests, detention by private persons is permitted and apply to both civilians and police officers outside their jurisdiction. Detention, being different from an arrest in the fact that a detainee may not be transported without consent, is permitted where probable cause exists that one has committed a felony, breach of peace, physical injury to another person, or theft or destruction of property … A person who makes a citizen’s arrest could risk exposing himself to possible lawsuits or criminal charges (such as charges of impersonating police, false imprisonment, kidnapping, or wrongful arrest) if the wrong person is apprehended or a suspect’s civil rights are violated.” In the case of the war criminals we propose detaining, they are most if not all public figures and we have all witnessed their felonies, as detailed above.

Be prepared to post your video online in multiple places: Youtube, Google, and After Downing Street.

Known upcoming public appearances of war criminals who should be protested and citizen arrested: List. Map. See also: War Criminals Watch.

For more on holding the biggest criminals accountable, see http://prosecutebushcheney.org

*****

See also: “Crimes and Misdemeanors: Slate’s interactive guide: Who in the Bush administration broke the law, and who could be prosecuted?” by Emily Bazelon, Kara Hadge, Dahlia Lithwick, and Chris Wilson. This guide includes some of those complicit in crimes other than war crimes, such as DOJ hirings and firings, destruction of CIA tapes, and illegal spying. (Of course, Karl Rove shows up in every part of every list.)


Source

New US gov’t study shows mercury in fish widespread

By DINA CAPPIELLO
August 19 2009
WASHINGTON (AP) – No fish can escape mercury pollution.

That’s the take-home message from a federal study of mercury contamination released Wednesday that tested fish from nearly 300 streams across the country. The toxic substance was found in every fish sampled, a finding that underscores how widespread mercury pollution has become.

But while all fish had traces of contamination, only about a quarter had mercury levels exceeding what the Environmental Protection Agency says is safe for people eating average amounts of fish.

The study by the U.S. Geological Survey is the most comprehensive look to date at mercury in the nation’s streams. From 1998 to 2005, scientists collected and tested more than a thousand fish, including bass, trout and catfish, from 291 streams nationwide.

“This science sends a clear message that our country must continue to confront pollution, restore our nation’s waterways, and protect the public from potential health dangers,” Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said in a statement.

Mercury consumed by eating fish can damage the nervous system and cause learning disabilities in developing fetuses and young children. The main source of mercury to most of the streams tested, according to the researchers, is emissions from coal-fired power plants. The mercury released from smokestacks here and abroad rains down into waterways, where natural processes convert it into methylmercury – a form that allows the toxin to wind its way up the food chain into fish.

Some of the highest levels in fish were detected in the remote blackwater streams along the coasts of the Carolinas, Georgia, Florida and Louisiana, where bacteria in surrounding forests and wetlands help in the conversion. The second-highest concentration of mercury was detected in largemouth bass from the North Fork of the Edisto River near Fairview Crossroads, S.C.

“Unfortunately, it’s the case that almost any fish you test will have mercury now,” said Andrew Rypel, a post-doctoral researcher at the University of Mississippi who has studied mercury contamination in fish throughout the Southeast. He said other research has shown mercury in fish from isolated areas of Alaska and Canada, and species that live in the deep ocean.

Mercury was also found in high concentrations in western streams that drain areas mined for mercury and gold. The most contaminated sample came from smallmouth bass collected from the Carson River at Dayton, Nev., an area tainted with mercury from gold mining. At 58 other streams, mostly in the West, the acidic conditions created by mining could also be contributing to the mercury levels, the researchers said.

“Some ecosystems are more sensitive than others,” said Barbara Scudder, the lead USGS scientist on the study.

All but two states – Alaska and Wyoming – have issued fish-consumption advisories because of mercury contamination. Some of the streams studied already had warnings.

“This is showing that the problem is much more widespread,” said Sonya Lunder, a senior analyst for the Environmental Working Group, which has pushed for stronger advisories on consumption of mercury-laden fish and controls on the sources of mercury pollution. “If you are living in an area that doesn’t have a mercury advisory, you should use caution.”

Earlier this year, the Obama administration said it would begin crafting a new regulations to control mercury emissions from power plants after a federal appeals court threw out plans drafted by the Bush administration and favored by industry. The Bush rule would have allowed power plants to buy and sell pollution credits, instead of requiring each plant to install equipment to reduce mercury pollution.

The EPA also has also proposed a new regulation to clamp down on emissions of mercury from cement plants.

___

On the Net:

U.S. Geological Survey: http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/mercury/

Source

Amber Alert: Abduction of Girl in Oshkosh

Up Date: Today is August 31 2009

There are no new reports on this incident.

If anyone hears of anything let me know on one of the newer threads I have posted and I will post it here.

Update For August 20 2009
Oshkosh Police Trying to Solve or Explain Reported Abduction

Oshkosh police on Thursday asked anyone who was in the area of Linwood Avenue and Walnut Street around 10:30 Wednesday morning to contact officers as officers try to explain what happened that led to a reported abduction.

For many hours, an Amber Alert ran across TV screens notifying the public of a girl Oshkosh police say was abducted Wednesday morning near Oshkosh North High School.

The police department says it has checked out dozens of tips but nothing has developed into a “substantial lead” and no one has reported a child missing.

A statement from the police department says police “are appealing to anyone that was involved in any situation … that could have been misinterpreted as being a violent encounter or abduction to please call.”

“We are only interested in identifying a possible explanation to this alleged incident and help us to resolve this investigation and set the community at ease,” crime prevention officer Joseph Nichols said.

According to police, an eleven-year-old boy saw two men get out of a car and pull a black girl, who appeared to be 12 to 14 years old, into their car in the 1100-block of Linwood Avenue near Walnut Street around 10:30.

The car is a maroon, older model, boxy four-door. It’s dirty and very rusty with holes on the driver’s side. There is a dent or “smudge” on the rear bumper. The license plate had the number 2 in it.

It was driven by a black male with a black and a white man as passengers. According to the witness, the passengers got out and hit the girl on the head, bound her hands, and pulled her into the car.

One of the black men wore a white tank top and ripped jean shorts. The white man had blonde hair, wore shorts and basketball shoes, and had a tattoo on his right calf.

The girl is described as about five feet tall and thin. She was wearing a pink tank top, orange shorts, and a gold headband. Source

August 19 2009


Witnesses Report Possible Abduction of Girl in Oshkosh – WBAY-TV Green Bay-Fox Cities-..Northeast Wisconsin

Source

Authorities have now issued an Amber Alert after the abduction of a girl near Oshkosh North High School this morning.

According to police, a witness saw two men get out of a car and pull a black girl, who is approximately 12 to 14 years old, into their car in the 1100-block of Linwood Avenue near Walnut Street around 10:30.

Witnesses said they were tying her up and she was screaming.

The car is a maroon, older model, boxy four-door. It’s dirty and very rusty with holes on the driver’s side. There is a dent or “smudge” on the rear bumper. The license plate had the number 2 in it.

It was driven by a black male with a black and a white man as passengers. The passengers are the ones who got out and grabbed the girl, witnesses indicated.

One of the black men wore a white tank top and ripped jean shorts. The white man had blonde hair, wore shorts and basketball shoes, and had a tattoo on his right calf.

The girl is described as about five feet tall and thin. She was wearing a pink tank top, orange shorts, and a gold headband. The child’s identity is not known at this time.

The car was last seen going east on Linwood.

Also

Source

By Chris Hrapsky

Law enforcement officials statewide are searching for a girl who was abducted Wednesday morning.

Authorities have now issued an Amber Alert after the reported abduction near Oshkosh North High School this morning.

According to police, a witness saw two men get out of a car and pull a black girl, who is approximately 12 to 14 years old, into their car in the 1100-block of Linwood Avenue near Walnut Street around 10:30.

The car is a maroon, older model, boxy four-door. It’s dirty and very rusty with holes on the driver’s side. There is a dent or “smudge” on the rear bumper. The license plate had the number 2 in it.

It was driven by a black male with a black and a white man as passengers. The passengers are the ones who got out and grabbed the girl, bound her hands, and pulled her into the car.

One of the black men wore a white tank top and ripped jean shorts. The white man had blonde hair, wore shorts and basketball shoes, and had a tattoo on his right calf.

The girl is described as about five feet tall and thin. She was wearing a pink tank top, orange shorts, and a gold headband. The child’s identity is not known at this time.

All this information comes from one witness — an eleven-year-old boy who says he saw the whole thing.

The boy says he was in his back yard picking tomatoes at the time. “I looked and I saw a girl and I said ‘hi’ to her.”

He says after the girl walked another block, a maroon car pulled up near her.

“Two men came out of the car – one standing by the door, the other hit her in the head and then bound her together then put her in the car, and then another person helped get her in the car and then they sped off,” he said.

The witness’s mother said he “ran in the house and said, ‘Mom, call 911. Someone has been taken from our street.’”

Police quickly responded and interviewed people in the area.

One neighbor just 30 feet away from the alleged abduction says he sat by an open window all morning and didn’t hear a thing.

“I question him. No screams, no tires pealing out, no noise whatsoever. If we would have heard tires squealing, we would have heard that right away,” neighbor David Schwartz said.

Police continue their search. Around 1:30 they issued an Amber Alert hoping the public can help them find the missing girl.

So far no one has reported a child missing and we do not know the name of the victim.

The young witness said he would recognize the two men if he saw them again.
// ]]>

Published in: on August 19, 2009 at 9:08 pm  Comments Off  
Tags: , , , , , ,

The Remarkable Courage of “Brian Haw” Anti War protester in Britain

3,000 days and counting… the lonely life of Brian

His body is weak, but Brian Haw’s spirit is still willing – even after eight years of protesting

By Jerome Taylor

August 18 2009

Brian Haw at his makeshift peace camp in Parliament Square

DAVID ASHDOWN

Brian Haw at his makeshift peace camp in Parliament Square

Brian Haw is definitely not a morning person. Today was the veteran activist’s 2,999th day camped out on the pavements of Parliament Square and the cantakerous 60-year-old was in no mood for small talk.

“I don’t do talk about the weather,” he grumbled, stirring a fifth spoonful of sugar into a milky cup of coffee which had just been boiled on a small gas burner behind his tent. “I hate it when people ask me all those silly questions, like ‘How’s it going? Did you sleep well?’ or ‘How long are you staying here?’ It’s meaningless.”

And he is equally nonplussed at the thought that tomorrow will mark the 3,000th day of a world-famous protest that defied an entire government and remains the most permanent symbol of free speech in a country which has suffered increasingly autocratic legislation curbing the right to free assembly.

“I’m not into this Guinness Book of Records rubbish,” he says, tipping back his pin-badge littered helmet to reveal a weathered face and two piercing blue eyes. “Three thousand bloody days, sleeping here and watching the politicians lie while children continue to die and people walk by. And each one of us is responsible. Each one of us, responsible.”

Eight years of living in a tent opposite the Houses of Parliament, railing against the country’s political elite through two bitterly controversial wars, has made Mr Haw an irritable man. Any of the friends, passers by, tourists and journalists who have come across him will be more than aware the deep seated anger he feels towards the British government, which he accuses of anything from “murder, to torture and genocide”.

When the former carpenter-turned-peace-activist first appeared outside the Houses of Parliament on the 2 June 2001 to begin his one man protest few could have guessed that he would stay there for what has already the best part of a decade. He began by demonstrating against Britain’s support for the UN sanctions in Iraq, but the ongoing wars in that country and Afghanistan have since given him plenty more opportunity to consolidate his contempt for British foreign policy.

Since then council chiefs, police and the Government have all tried and failed to evict him. Tired of his non-stop megaphone vigils, MPs even passed a specific piece of legislation aimed at ridding Parliament Square of his presence which – for the first time in over 350 years – effectively made it illegal to protest outside the Houses of Parliament without permission (a promise by Gordon Brown to repeal that law has so far failed to materialise). Undeterred, Mr Haw has fought and eventually won every attempt to have him removed.

The sheer logistics of his continued protest are remarkable. For the past 3,000 days Mr Haw has called the pavement opposite the Houses of Parliament his home. His bed is nestled under a leaking and weather beaten tent whilst the few possessions he has beyond the limited remaining placards he is allowed to display by Westminster City Council lie under a tarpaulin sheet which crawls with mice.

A modern day ascetic, he survives purely on the kindness of strangers and a small contingent of sympathisers who donate food and tobacco, which has lent him a thick bronchial cough that splutters throughout much of his sentences.

Daily washes, meanwhile, are made in a bucket but once a week he has the luxury of being able to take a shower at the home of an anonymous supporter. To stay in contact with the outside world he beckons all and sundry to his makeshift shrine or calls friends on his mobile phone, which is charged by a sympathetic toilet attendant in Westminster tube station.

But eight years of living on the streets have clearly taken their toll. Mr Haw’s weathered skin and viciously tanned arms are testament to the days on end spent out in the elements and his frame is visibly skeletal.

Leaning forward on two crutches and sporting a t-shirt emblazoned with anti-war slogans, Mr Haw cuts a lonely figure among the thronging crowds of scantily clad tourists who stop to take pictures of Parliament’s most eccentric resident.

A year into his protest, his wife Kay filed for divorce and he rarely sees any of their seven children who now range from 16-30-years-old. Although he has previously insisted his family support his vigil, births, weddings and birthdays have all gone by leaving the father of seven deeply embittered.

“My kids are an off limit topic,””he says, angered by the question of whether they still stay in touch with him. “But I have effectively lost my family because our nation doesn’t care enough. I love my wife and children so much. But I blame the Government for losing them because I shouldn’t have been here eight years. I didn’t want to be here eight bloody years but while the killing and murder continues, I’m staying.”

Despite living his life so publicly, Mr Haw remains a deeply private person. Personal questions inevitably receive replies that wind their way back to his raison d’etre – the ongoing conflict in Afghanistan or the war in Iraq.

For instance, in answer to a question about whether he prays (Mr Haw is an evangelical Christian) he replies: “People get so organised don’t they? They think that prayer is something you do on your knees. Well I bet there are a few soldiers praying on the other side of the world right now. And who is going to answer their prayers? I would suggest that you are the answer to your own prayers, if you get off your arse and do something.”

One of the few times he breaks into a smile is remembering how he was voted Most Inspiring Political Figure at the 2007 Channel 4 Political Awards. “Yeah, that felt damn good,” he recalls. “Ordinary Joe Bloggs on the street being voted ahead of Blair, Cameron and General “Donut” Dannatt. That felt great.”

But while Mr Haw remains an angry individual who feels he is a long way from achieving his goal of “peace, love and justice for all”, his days of fighting the law over his pitch are largely over.

If anything, his peace campaign has grown. There are now anywhere between three and five regular campaigners who join Mr Haw in Parliament Square and local officials appear to have largely abandoned trying to evict them.

Barbara Tucker – or “Babs” as she is known among the campers – is the square’s longest squatting resident after Mr Haw. Barring her 33 arrests, the half Australian half English protestor, who is campaigning for peace in the Middle East, has herself camped out for more than 1,000 days now.

“”t was Brian that inspired me,” she says. “I had the complete capitalist lifestyle before all this but I gave it up when my two sons reached adulthood. Brian showed me that a single man can make a difference. Everyday we meet so many people from around the world who have heard what he has done and want to meet him when they are in London, it’s amazing.”

As a busload of tourists pass by and all shout out “Hi Brian!” at the behest of a tour operator with a microphone, it is clear that Mr Haw’s

protest is now as much part of Parliament’s landscape as Churchill or Cromwell’s statue. And it’s clear he’s not going anywhere fast.

“I’m not leaving because we haven’t finished the job,” he says. “We are all responsible for what our Government does in our name. When our country does good we can be proud of that, and when it does wrong we must hold the liars to account. And we have to keep doing that.”

Source

Brian’s courage and dedication is amazing.  Beyond astonishing.

If everyone were more like Brian bless his heart,  maybe war could be ended.

My endless admiration goes out to you Brian. Very few could ever do what you are doing.

Bless those who help you in your quest for Peace.

To the rest of the people around the world. One person can make a difference. Everyone in their own way can evoke change.

Brian is like a guiding light on the horizon.  He sees hope where most do not.  If one man can dedicate so much to a cause, imagine what we all could do if we joined him in his quest.

Published in: on August 18, 2009 at 8:55 pm  Comments Off  
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

A Canadian doctor diagnoses U.S. healthcare

A few Differences to consider especially in cost saving with Universal Public Health Care.

The caricature of ‘socialized medicine’ is used by corporate interests to confuse Americans and maintain their bottom lines instead of patients’ health.

Universal health insurance is on the American policy agenda for the fifth time since World War II. In the 1960s, the U.S. chose public coverage for only the elderly and the very poor, while Canada opted for a universal program for hospitals and physicians’ services. As a policy analyst, I know there are lessons to be learned from studying the effect of different approaches in similar jurisdictions. But, as a Canadian with lots of American friends and relatives, I am saddened that Americans seem incapable of learning them.

Our countries are joined at the hip. We peacefully share a continent, a British heritage of representative government and now ownership of GM. And, until 50 years ago, we had similar health systems, healthcare costs and vital statistics.

The U.S.’ and Canada’s different health insurance decisions make up the world’s largest health policy experiment. And the results?

On coverage, all Canadians have insurance for hospital and physician services. There are no deductibles or co-pays. Most provinces also provide coverage for programs for home care, long-term care, pharmaceuticals and durable medical equipment, although there are co-pays.

On the U.S. side, 46 million people have no insurance, millions are underinsured and healthcare bills bankrupt more than 1 million Americans every year.

Lesson No. 1: A single-payer system would eliminate most U.S. coverage problems.

On costs, Canada spends 10% of its economy on healthcare; the U.S. spends 16%. The extra 6% of GDP amounts to more than $800 billion per year. The spending gap between the two nations is almost entirely because of higher overhead. Canadians don’t need thousands of actuaries to set premiums or thousands of lawyers to deny care. Even the U.S. Medicare program has 80% to 90% lower administrative costs than private Medicare Advantage policies. And providers and suppliers can’t charge as much when they have to deal with a single payer.

Lessons No. 2 and 3: Single-payer systems reduce duplicative administrative costs and can negotiate lower prices.

Because most of the difference in spending is for non-patient care, Canadians actually get more of most services. We see the doctor more often and take more drugs. We even have more lung transplant surgery. We do get less heart surgery, but not so much less that we are any more likely to die of heart attacks. And we now live nearly three years longer, and our infant mortality is 20% lower.

Lesson No. 4: Single-payer plans can deliver the goods because their funding goes to services, not overhead.

The Canadian system does have its problems, and these also provide important lessons. Notwithstanding a few well-publicized and misleading cases, Canadians needing urgent care get immediate treatment. But we do wait too long for much elective care, including appointments with family doctors and specialists and selected surgical procedures. We also do a poor job managing chronic disease.

However, according to the New York-based Commonwealth Fund, both the American and the Canadian systems fare badly in these areas. In fact, an April U.S. Government Accountability Office report noted that U.S. emergency room wait times have increased, and patients who should be seen immediately are now waiting an average of 28 minutes. The GAO has also raised concerns about two- to four-month waiting times for mammograms.

On closer examination, most of these problems have little to do with public insurance or even overall resources. Despite the delays, the GAO said there is enough mammogram capacity.

These problems are largely caused by our shared politico-cultural barriers to quality of care. In 19th century North America, doctors waged a campaign against quacks and snake-oil salesmen and attained a legislative monopoly on medical practice. In return, they promised to set and enforce standards of practice. By and large, it didn’t happen. And perverse incentives like fee-for-service make things even worse.

Using techniques like those championed by the Boston-based Institute for Healthcare Improvement, providers can eliminate most delays. In Hamilton, Ontario, 17 psychiatrists have linked up with 100 family doctors and 80 social workers to offer some of the world’s best access to mental health services. And in Toronto, simple process improvements mean you can now get your hip assessed in one week and get a new one, if you need it, within a month.

Lesson No. 5: Canadian healthcare delivery problems have nothing to do with our single-payer system and can be fixed by re-engineering for quality.

U.S. health policy would be miles ahead if policymakers could learn these lessons. But they seem less interested in Canada’s, or any other nation’s, experience than ever. Why?

American democracy runs on money. Pharmaceutical and insurance companies have the fuel. Analysts see hundreds of billions of premiums wasted on overhead that could fund care for the uninsured. But industry executives and shareholders see bonuses and dividends.

Compounding the confusion is traditional American ignorance of what happens north of the border, which makes it easy to mislead people. Boilerplate anti-government rhetoric does the same. The U.S. media, legislators and even presidents have claimed that our “socialized” system doesn’t let us choose our own doctors. In fact, Canadians have free choice of physicians. It’s Americans these days who are restricted to “in-plan” doctors.

Unfortunately, many Americans won’t get to hear the straight goods because vested interests are promoting a caricature of the Canadian experience.

Michael M. Rachlis is a physician, health policy analyst and author in Toronto.

Source

What’s so great about private health insurance?

The bloody battle in Congress over a ‘public option’ ignores the insurers’ role in creating the nation’s healthcare crisis and their efforts to throttle reform.

By Michael Hiltzik And American point of view.

Throughout the heroic struggle in Congress to provide a “public option” in health insurance, one question never seems to get answered: Why are we so intent on protecting the private option? The “public option,” as followers of the debate know, is a government-sponsored health plan that would be available as an alternative to, and in competition with, the for-profit health insurance industry, otherwise known as the private option. On Friday, the House Committee on Energy and Commerce narrowly passed a reform bill incorporating a public option resembling Medicare. It was a bloody fight among members of Congress, some of whom believe that the public option will give the government unwarranted power over healthcare, and all of whom enjoy government-provided healthcare that’s a lot better than what most of us get. But the battle is just beginning. After the committee vote, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi warned that the health insurance industry will conduct a “shock and awe” campaign to kill the public option when Congress returns from vacation in September and starts debating the measure. We can expect to be overwhelmed with an industry ad campaign worth millions of dollars (remember Harry and Louise?) exhorting us to write our lawmakers to preserve the American way of healthcare. So it’s proper to remind ourselves what that American way entails. For if the insurers have proved anything over the last 15 years as the health crisis has gathered speed like an avalanche roaring downhill, it’s that they’re part of the problem, not the solution. The firms take billions of dollars out of the U.S. healthcare wallet as profits, while imposing enormous administrative costs on doctors, hospitals, employers and patients. They’ve introduced complexity into the system at every level. Your doctor has to fight them to get approval for the treatment he or she thinks is best for you. Your hospital has to fight them for approval for every day you’re laid up. Then they have to fight them to get their bills paid, and you do too. One Wendell Potter reminded a Senate committee in June that health insurance executives had assured Congress in 1993 that they would work to secure universal medical coverage and end denials of coverage to people with pre-existing conditions. Then they moved heaven and earth to kill reform. They’ve made the same promises now, Potter observed. But they’re in an even better position to throttle reform. Mergers and acquisitions have turned the industry into a cartel of huge corporations. “The industry is bigger, richer and stronger, and it has a much tighter grip on our healthcare system,” he said. The last thing they want is a government program set up as their competition. Potter knows the insurers’ ways because he was a top executive in the industry for 20 years. But the hard numbers bear him out. The two largest insurers, WellPoint and UnitedHealth Group, each acquired 11 other insurers between 2000 and 2007. They now control a total of 67 million “covered lives” (that’s customers in health insurance-speak). This consolidation has produced functional monopolies in communities across America. The American Medical Assn. (itself no great fan of reform) found in a 2007 survey that in 76% of the country, defined as its major metropolitan statistical areas, one insurer had a share of 50% or more of the conventional insurance market. This phenomenon gives the companies enormous power to drive up premiums and maximize profits. Why do we tolerate this? The industry loves to promote surveys indicating that most Americans are “satisfied” with their current health insurance — 37% are “very satisfied” and 17% “extremely satisfied,” according to one such study. Yet these figures are misleading. Most people are satisfied with their current insurance because most people never have a complex encounter with the health insurance bureaucracy. Medical care generally follows the so-called 80-20 statistical pattern — 20% of patients consume 80% of care. If your typical encounter is an annual checkup or treatment of the kids’ sniffles, or even a serious but routine condition such as a heart attack, your experience is probably satisfactory. But it’s on the margins where the challenges exist. Anyone whose condition is even slightly out of the ordinary knows the sinking feeling of entering health insurance hell — pre-authorizations, denials, appeals, and days, weeks, even months wasted waiting for resolution. And that’s among people with affordable employer-paid insurance, an ever-shrinking cohort. The percentage of small and medium-sized businesses offering health coverage to employees shriveled to 38% from 67% between 1995 and 2008, according to the National Small Business Assn. Without reform, the number will continue to plummet. Meanwhile, people employed by big companies that offer a health plan are within a layoff notice of losing coverage for themselves or their families, joining America’s 46 million uninsured. Their only alternative right now is the individual market, where insurers scrutinize applicants’ medical histories, looking for reasons to turn them down or charge them exorbitant premiums. Have hay fever, asthma, a cholesterol pill prescription? Are you a woman of child-bearing age? You’re virtually uninsurable at an affordable cost. Even if you’re accepted, your carrier reserves the right to cancel your policy retroactively if it finds that you left even a tiny condition from years back off your application. The public option may be your lifeline — if it’s enacted. Signs of the industry’s mobilization against the public option are everywhere. I don’t claim clairvoyance for having predicted this development back in March; given the industry’s record on reform, a child could have done so. You’ve heard of the Blue Dog Democrats, those mostly rural conservatives who blocked a summertime vote on reform legislation on Capitol Hill? According to the Center for Public Integrity, the biggest backer of the Blue Dogs’ political action committee is the healthcare industry, which is on the path to pumping a total of $1.2 million into the PAC’s maw in the current 2009-10 election cycle. Then there’s the advocacy group called the Campaign for an American Solution, which describes itself as “a grass-roots effort . . . to build support for workable healthcare reform.” The organization owns up to being an “initiative” of America’s Health Insurance Plans, or AHIP, the industry’s chief lobbying arm. Unless I’ve missed a radical change in lawn and garden horticulture, you can’t get much further from the grass roots than to be a creation of the industry with the biggest stake in the debate. Despite all this, America’s health insurance plans, which helped create our dysfunctional world, are deferred to as though they’re a disinterested party. AHIP subtitled one of its policy papers “A Vision for Reform.” But are the insurers now, and have they ever been, anything other than a roadblock?

Source

The brutal truth about America’s healthcare

The Health Insurance Racket: Getting Rich by Denying Americans Care

Obama fights Health Care Reform Propaganda

Fox News’ “Glenn Beck” loses advertisers

August 12, 2009

By Kenneth Hein

NEW YORK

Some of the nation’s biggest advertisers are distancing themselves from Fox News host Glenn Beck after he called President Obama a racist during a July 28 broadcast.

Geico has pulled its ads from Fox News Channel’s “The Glenn Beck Program.” Lawyers.com, which is owned by LexisNexis, also has vowed not to advertise during the program, according to Color of Change, an African-American online political organization that has been urging advertisers to stop supporting the show.

Additionally, Procter & Gamble, Progressive Insurance and SC Johnson all said their ad placements during the broadcast were made in error and that they would correct the mistake.

The controversy stems from Beck’s comment that President Obama is a “racist” with “a deep-seated hatred for white people.”

Geico spent more than a half-billion dollars on ads last year, according to the Nielsen Co. It spent more than a quarter-billion dollars in the first half of 2009.

A Fox representative noted that Geico is dropping its ads from the show but was quick to note that it was shifting dollars to other programs. “The advertisers referenced have all moved their spots from Beck to other programs on the network, so there has been no revenue lost,” the rep said.

Beck’s show pulled in an average of slightly more than 2 million viewers for each of its 19 telecasts in July, according to Nielsen.

Progressive Insurance representative Cristy Cote said that there has been a lot of confusion surrounding the company’s involvement with the program. “We had not bought advertising on the show in the first place,” she said, “so when we learned that our advertising had appeared on the show by mistake, we contacted the network to correct the error.”

She said Progressive tries to “avoid programing that we believe our customers and potential customers might find extremely offensive.”

A Procter & Gamble representative echoed that sentiment: “At times our ads are run by mistake on shows that they were not meant to … Any of our ads that ran did so by mistake, and we’ll try to make sure that doesn’t happen in the future.”

Editing by SheriLinden

Source

More people should pull their ads from Fox all together.

Color of Change is not the only group asking to have ads pulled.

Tell Walmart to Pull Its Advertising Dollars from The Glenn Beck Program

Tell Verizon Wireless: Stop supporting Glenn Beck’s race-baiting hate speech

I found most of their news to be lacking in truth and many times offensive.

There are other more honest places to spend advertsing Dollars.

By the way, in case you had any doubt about how hard the conservative media are working to defeat health care reform (and I know you did), just take a look at this study Media Matters for America conducted. Over a two-day period (August 10 and 11), we tallied up the guests on Fox News who discussed health care. The result: 10 supported progressive reforms, and 63 opposed them. As always, fair and balanced.   Source

Health Insurance Abuses

The brutal truth about America’s healthcare

The Health Insurance Racket: Getting Rich by Denying Americans Care

Obama fights Health Care Reform Propaganda

Published in: on August 16, 2009 at 12:33 am  Comments Off  
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

The brutal truth about America’s healthcare

An extraordinary report from Guy Adams in Los Angeles at the music arena that has been turned into a makeshift medical centre

August 15, 2009

The LA Forum in Inglewood, California, hosted dental and medical examinations, for thousands of people thanks to the charity Remote Area Medical. Some waited, above, for 36 hours to see the medical staff

GETTY IMAGES; AFP

The LA Forum in Inglewood, California, hosted dental and medical examinations, for thousands of people thanks to the charity Remote Area Medical. Some waited, above, for 36 hours to see the medical staff.

They came in their thousands, queuing through the night to secure one of the coveted wristbands offering entry into a strange parallel universe where medical care is a free and basic right and not an expensive luxury. Some of these Americans had walked miles simply to have their blood pressure checked, some had slept in their cars in the hope of getting an eye-test or a mammogram, others had brought their children for immunisations that could end up saving their life.

In the week that Britain’s National Health Service was held aloft by Republicans as an “evil and Orwellian” example of everything that is wrong with free healthcare, these extraordinary scenes in Inglewood, California yesterday provided a sobering reminder of exactly why President Barack Obama is trying to reform the US system.

The LA Forum, the arena that once hosted sell-out Madonna concerts, has been transformed – for eight days only – into a vast field hospital. In America, the offer of free healthcare is so rare, that news of the magical medical kingdom spread rapidly and long lines of prospective patients snaked around the venue for the chance of getting everyday treatments that many British people take for granted.

In the first two days, more than 1,500 men, women and children received free treatments worth $503,000 (£304,000). Thirty dentists pulled 471 teeth; 320 people were given standard issue spectacles; 80 had mammograms; dozens more had acupuncture, or saw kidney specialists. By the time the makeshift medical centre leaves town on Tuesday, staff expect to have dispensed $2m worth of treatments to 10,000 patients.

The gritty district of Inglewood lies just a few miles from the palm-lined streets of Beverly Hills and the bright lights of Hollywood, but is a world away. And the residents who had flocked for the free medical care, courtesy of mobile charity Remote Area Medical, bore testament to the human cost of the healthcare mess that President Obama is attempting to fix.

Christine Smith arrived at 3am in the hope of seeing a dentist for the first time since she turned 18. That was almost eight years ago. Her need is obvious and pressing: 17 of her teeth are rotten; some have large visible holes in them. She is living in constant pain and has been unable to eat solid food for several years.

“I had a gastric bypass in 2002, but it went wrong, and stomach acid began rotting my teeth. I’ve had several jobs since, but none with medical insurance, so I’ve not been able to see a dentist to get it fixed,” she told The Independent. “I’ve not been able to chew food for as long as I can remember. I’ve been living on soup, and noodles, and blending meals in a food mixer. I’m in constant pain. Normally, it would cost $5,000 to fix it. So if I have to wait a week to get treated for free, I’ll do it. This will change my life.”

Along the hall, Liz Cruise was one of scores of people waiting for a free eye exam. She works for a major supermarket chain but can’t afford the $200 a month that would be deducted from her salary for insurance. “It’s a simple choice: pay my rent, or pay my healthcare. What am I supposed to do?” she asked. “I’m one of the working poor: people who do work but can’t afford healthcare and are ineligible for any free healthcare or assistance. I can’t remember the last time I saw a doctor.”

Although the Americans spend more on medicine than any nation on earth, there are an estimated 50 million with no health insurance at all. Many of those who have jobs can’t afford coverage, and even those with standard policies often find it doesn’t cover commonplace procedures. California’s unemployed – who rely on Medicaid – had their dental care axed last month.

Julie Shay was one of the many, waiting to slide into a dentist’s chair where teeth were being drilled in full view of passers-by. For years, she has been crossing over the Mexican border to get her teeth done on the cheap in Tijuana. But recently, the US started requiring citizens returning home from Mexico to produce a passport (previously all you needed was a driver’s license), and so that route is now closed. Today she has two abscesses and is in so much pain she can barely sleep. “I don’t have a passport, and I can’t afford one. So my husband and I slept in the car to make sure we got seen by a dentist. It sounds pathetic, but I really am that desperate.”

“You’d think, with the money in this country, that we’d be able to look after people’s health properly,” she said. “But the truth is that the rich, and the insurance firms, just don’t realise what we are going through, or simply don’t care. Look around this room and tell me that America’s healthcare don’t need fixing.”

President Obama’s healthcare plans had been a central plank of his first-term programme, but his reform package has taken a battering at the hands of Republican opponents in recent weeks. As the Democrats have failed to coalesce around a single, straightforward proposal, their rivals have seized on public hesitancy over “socialised medicine” and now the chance of far-reaching reform is in doubt.

Most damaging of all has been the tide of vociferous right-wing opponents whipping up scepticism at town hall meetings that were supposed to soothe doubts. In Pennsylvania this week, Senator Arlen Specter was greeted by a crowd of 1,000 at a venue designed to accommodate only 250, and of the 30 selected speakers at the event, almost all were hostile.

The packed bleachers in the LA Forum tell a different story. The mobile clinic has been organised by the remarkable Remote Area Medical. The charity usually focuses on the rural poor, although they worked in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. Now they are moving into more urban venues, this week’s event in Los Angeles is believed to be the largest free healthcare operation in the country.

Doctors, dentists and therapists volunteer their time, and resources to the organisation. To many US medical professionals, it offers a rare opportunity to plug into the public service ethos on which their trade was supposedly founded. “People come here who haven’t seen a doctor for years. And we’re able to say ‘Hey, you have this, you have this, you have this’,” said Dr Vincent Anthony, a kidney specialist volunteering five days of his team’s time. “It’s hard work, but incredibly rewarding. Healthcare needs reform, obviously. There are so many people falling through the cracks, who don’t get care. That’s why so many are here.”

Ironically, given this week’s transatlantic spat over the NHS, Remote Area Medical was founded by an Englishman: Stan Brock. The 72-year-old former public schoolboy, Taekwondo black belt, and one-time presenter of Wild Kingdom, one of America’s most popular animal TV shows, left the celebrity gravy train in 1985 to, as he puts it, “make people better”.

Today, Brock has no money, no income, and no bank account. He spends 365 days a year at the charity events, sleeping on a small rolled-up mat on the floor and living on a diet made up entirely of porridge and fresh fruit. In some quarters, he has been described, without too much exaggeration, as a living saint.

Though anxious not to interfere in the potent healthcare debate, Mr Brock said yesterday that he, and many other professionals, believes the NHS should provide a benchmark for the future of US healthcare.

“Back in 1944, the UK government knew there was a serious problem with lack of healthcare for 49.7 million British citizens, of which I was one, so they said ‘Hey Mr Nye Bevan, you’re the Minister for Health… go fix it’. And so came the NHS. Well, fast forward now 66 years, and we’ve got about the same number of people, about 49 million people, here in the US, who don’t have access to healthcare.”

“I’ve been very conservative in my outlook for the whole of my life. I’ve been described as being about 90,000 miles to the right of Attila the Hun. But I think one reaches the reality that something doesn’t work… In this country something has to be done. And as a proud member of the US community but a loyal British subject to the core, I would say that if Britain could fix it in 1944, surely we could fix it here in America.

Healthcare compared

Health spending as a share of GDP

US 16%

UK 8.4%

Public spending on healthcare (% of total spending on healthcare)

US 45%

UK 82%

Health spending per head

US $7,290

UK $2,992

Practising physicians (per 1,000 people)

US 2.4

UK 2.5

Nurses (per 1,000 people)

US 10.6

UK 10.0

Acute care hospital beds (per 1,000 people)

US 2.7

UK 2.6

Life expectancy:

US 78

UK 80

Infant mortality (per 1,000 live births)

US 6.7

UK 4.8

Source

Health Insurance Abuses in US

The Health Insurance Racket: Getting Rich by Denying Americans Care

Obama fights Health Care Reform Propaganda

Indexed List of all Stories in Archives

Published in: on August 15, 2009 at 1:47 am  Comments Off  
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

The Health Insurance Racket: Getting Rich by Denying Americans Care

The Health Insurance Racket:

Getting Rich by Denying Americans Care

UnitedHealthcare CEO Stephen Hemsley owns $744,232,068 in unexercised stock options. CIGNA’s Edward Hanway spends his holidays in a $13 million beach house in New Jersey. Meanwhile, regular Americans are routinely denied coverage for the care they need when they need it most. Welcome to the American health insurance industry. Instead of helping policyholders attain the health security they need for their families, big insurance companies get rich by denying coverage to patients. Now they’re sending lobbyists to Washington, DC to twist the arms of lawmakers to oppose reform of the status quo. Why? Because the status quo pays. Learn more about the glamorous lives of billionaire health insurance executives and tell us your story of being victimized by their greed.

Hundreds of entertainment industry workers in California and New Jersey who buy health insurance as a group are being hit with a rate increase that will raise some family-plan premiums to more than $44,000 a year.

There are also some Videos at the site as well as a bit of information on how much CEO’s make  a year.  They make millions while average folks die because of their greed.

Micheal Moores “Sicko” was enlightening and he also recieved hundreds and hundreds of stories of people being shafted by insurance companies. etc. That is just the tip of a massive Iceburg however.

Well there is more that people should know about and the above site has some rather interesting information and they too are looking for stories as well.

Senator Sanders is going to be speaking about healthcare reform on Thursday’s Senator Sanders Unfiltered

One might want to have a listen to what he has to say.

One of your friend may die or you may die or go untreated becasue Insurance companies rip you off by dening treatment or you may loss everything just becasue you are ill. You may not even be able to afford Insurance.

Get educated and get active to get Universal Health Care for everyone.

The life you save may be your childs, your wife, your parents or your best friend. You may even save your own life.

Obama fights Health Care Reform Propaganda

Move on. org is also involved
Right-wing mobs aren’t just disrupting congressional town halls—their outlandish lies are now making their way into mainstream news coverage, too.
We need to set the record straight. The majority of Americans support real health care reform. And no wonder, given the incredible cost of inaction.In the U.S., 14,000 people lose their coverage every day.1 And for those with insurance, yearly premiums will hit $22,000 in a few years if we don’t act.2
We can’t let right-wing extremists ruin the biggest opportunity in a generation to get real reform.Can you send a quick letter to the editor of your local paper about the urgent need for Congress to pass health care reform with a real public option?
Click here:


Our tool makes writing a letter really simple. You can send the letter right from our website—it only takes a few minutes.
If you’ve never written a letter to the editor before, now is the time to send your first. The letters page is one of the most widely read—and most important—in local newspapers. Members of Congress and their staffs read it to understand how their constituents are feeling. And since members are all home in the district this month—and paying close attention to the health care debate in particular—your letter will make an even bigger impact.

Here are some talking points specific you can use in your letter:

  • We can’t afford to wait for reform: Each day, 14,000 people in the U.S. lose their health care coverage. And without reform, those who still have insurance will see their yearly premiums go up by $9,000 in the next decade—to a staggering $22,000.
  • Reform with a real public option is key to expanding coverage: Under current legislation, which includes a strong public health insurance option, 37 million Americans will gain coverage by 2019.3
  • A real public health insurance option is crucial to lowering costs: With premiums projected to hit $22,000, we need to get costs down. By spurring competition, a public plan will help bring down out-of-control costs4 for individuals, families, and small businesses.
  • Can you send a letter to the editor of your local newspaper, as part of our “Real Voices for Change” campaign? Just click here to get started:
    http://pol.moveon.org/lte?campaign_id=117&id=16801-6729775-L4VKDMx&t=4
    Sources:1. “Health Care in Crisis: 14,000 Losing Coverage Each Day,” Center for American Progress, February 19, 2009.
    http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51653&id=16801-6729775-L4VKDMx&t=52. “Health Care Premiums Run Amok,” Center for American Progress, July 24, 2009.
    http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51667&id=16801-6729775-L4VKDMx&t=63. “Coverage for America: We All Stand to Gain,” Families USA, July 2009.
    http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51751&id=16801-6729775-L4VKDMx&t=74. “Why We Need a Public Health-Care Plan,” The Wall Street Journal, June 24, 2009. http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51737&id=16801-6729775-L4VKDMx&t=8

    Published in: on August 13, 2009 at 5:53 pm  Comments Off  
    Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

    Obama fights Health Care Reform Propaganda

    Obama looks West, to the Web in health care fight
    By PHILIP ELLIOTT
    Aug. 12, 2009
    WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama is turning his eyes West and hitting the Web as he steps up his counteroffensive against critics of a proposed health care overhaul.

    Obama assailed “wild misrepresentations” of his health care plan Tuesday during a town hall-style meeting in Portsmouth, N.H., taking on the role of fact-checker-in-chief for his top domestic priority. It’s a strategy he will employ at two more town halls this week in Montana and Colorado, and on the White House Web site.

    To that end, the Obama-aligned Democratic National Committee is running health care overhaul ads nationally on cable channels and in spots the president will visit, joining a chorus of ads that has become a cacophony over a problem that has vexed Washington for decades.

    On the other side, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce was joining the fray Wednesday, beginning to air 30-second spots in about 20 states criticizing the Democratic proposal to offer optional government health coverage, according to R. Bruce Josten, executive vice president of the nation’s largest business group.

    The multimillion-dollar buy would be one of the largest so far critical of Obama’s effort, in a year in which opponents have been heavily outspent by supporters of the president’s plan. The spot, showing a balloon being inflated until it bursts, says: “Big tax increases, huge deficits, expanded government control of health care. Call Congress.”

    In Portsmouth, Obama faced a polite crowd of 1,800 packed into a high school auditorium and a nationwide audience watching on cable television. He urged them not to listen to those who seek to “scare and mislead” on his plans to overhaul the nation’s health care system.

    “Where we do disagree, let’s disagree over things that are real, not these wild misrepresentations that bear no resemblance to anything that’s actually been proposed,” he said. “Because the way politics works sometimes is that people who want to keep things the way they are will try to scare the heck out of folks, and they’ll create boogeymen out there.”

    The boogeymen have prompted the White House to strike back. The president ticked off the highest-profile, most emotional issues that critics have used to greatest advantage to interrupt town hall meetings held by lawmakers home for the August congressional recess.

    For instance, Obama said the Democratic health care legislation would not create “death panels” to deny care to frail seniors — or “basically pull the plug on grandma because we decided that it’s too expensive to let her live anymore,” as the president put it. The provision he said had led to such talk would only authorize Medicare to pay doctors for counseling patients about end-of-life care if they want it, he contended.

    He also disputed accusations that he seeks a federally run system, or one in which the government makes decisions about care.

    Obama’s new message, sharpened amid sliding public support for him and his plan, targeted a vital and, polls show, particularly skeptical audience: the tens of millions of people who already have health insurance and aren’t yet convinced of a need to spend billions of dollars to change it or cover the nearly 50 million people who lack coverage.

    That message is finding reinforcements online. The White House launched a Web site to counter critics and asked supporters to share with them e-mails they say misrepresent Obama’s positions. It’s a tactic similar to the one the tech-savvy Obama campaign used to win the White House.
    Source

    Well I am quite sure the Insurance companies will be putting out all sorts of propaganda about Health Care reforms.  Wouldn’t want anyone cutting into their profits.  Insurance companies will do anything and everything possible to stop any changes to Health Care, including lie to people. Fear mongering at it’s finest. Considering how may people are without health care and how many are insured and still denied treatments, people should be a bit more intelligent then to believe the the propaganda being put out there.  Many countries around the world have Government run Health Care systems and the majority work just fine. Universal Health Care is something no one should be afraid of unless of course you are the one loosing profits like insurance companies. Imagine never having a problem getting treated for an injuries or an illness.  Insurance companies could care less if you live or die.  No one should be denied Health Care. Insurance companies should be removed from the Health Care system as far as I am concerned.  They only profit from the sick and helpless. You may pay more taxes for Health Care, but when you remove the payments to Insurance companies you will pay less in the long run.  Government run Health Care is cheaper then through insurance companies. Governments don’t need profit, insurance companies do.

    Health Care

    “I suffer no illusions that this will be an easy process. It will be hard. But I also know that nearly a century after Teddy Roosevelt first called for reform, the cost of our health care has weighed down our economy and the conscience of our nation long enough. So let there be no doubt: health care reform cannot wait, it must not wait, and it will not wait another year.”

    – President Barack Obama, February 24, 2009

    Progress

    • The President signed the Children’s Health Insurance Reauthorization Act on February 4, 2009, which provides quality health care to 11 million kids – 4 million who were previously uninsured.
    • The President’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act protects health coverage for 7 million Americans who lose their jobs through a 65 percent COBRA subsidy to make coverage affordable.
    • The Recovery Act also invests $19 billion in computerized medical records that will help to reduce costs and improve quality while ensuring patients’ privacy.
    • The Recovery Act also provides:
      • $1 billion for prevention and wellness to improve America’s health and help to reduce health care costs;
      • $1.1 billion for research to give doctors tools to make the best treatment decisions for their patients by providing objective information on the relative benefits of treatments; and
      • $500 million for health workforce to help train the next generation of doctors and nurses.

    Guiding Principles

    President Obama is committed to working with Congress to pass comprehensive health reform in his first year in order to control rising health care costs, guarantee choice of doctor, and assure high-quality, affordable health care for all Americans.

    Comprehensive health care reform can no longer wait. Rapidly escalating health care costs are crushing family, business, and government budgets. Employer-sponsored health insurance premiums have doubled in the last 9 years, a rate 3 times faster than cumulative wage increases. This forces families to sit around the kitchen table to make impossible choices between paying rent or paying health premiums. Given all that we spend on health care, American families should not be presented with that choice. The United States spent approximately $2.2 trillion on health care in 2007, or $7,421 per person – nearly twice the average of other developed nations. Americans spend more on health care than on housing or food. If rapid health cost growth persists, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that by 2025, one out of every four dollars in our national economy will be tied up in the health system. This growing burden will limit other investments and priorities that are needed to grow our economy. Rising health care costs also affect our economic competitiveness in the global economy, as American companies compete against companies in other countries that have dramatically lower health care costs.

    The President has vowed that the health reform process will be different in his Administration – an open, inclusive, and transparent process where all ideas are encouraged and all parties work together to find a solution to the health care crisis. Working together with members of Congress, doctors and hospitals, businesses and unions, and other key health care stakeholders, the President is committed to making sure we finally enact comprehensive health care reform.

    The Administration believes that comprehensive health reform should:

    • Reduce long-term growth of health care costs for businesses and government
    • Protect families from bankruptcy or debt because of health care costs
    • Guarantee choice of doctors and health plans
    • Invest in prevention and wellness
    • Improve patient safety and quality of care
    • Assure affordable, quality health coverage for all Americans
    • Maintain coverage when you change or lose your job
    • End barriers to coverage for people with pre-existing medical conditions

    Please visit www.HealthReform.gov to learn more about the President’s commitment to enacting comprehensive health reform this year.

    Source

    Don’t let Insurance Companies destroy the lives of people anymore.

    Universal Health Care is the way to go. Let the people win this one.

    All people rich or poor,  deserve Universal Health Care.

    Published in: on August 12, 2009 at 4:18 pm  Comments Off  
    Tags: , , , , , , , ,

    U.S. military monitors Twitter, YouTube

    August 10, 2009

    WASHINGTON — As the Pentagon warns of the security risks posed by social networking sites, newly released government documents show the military also uses these Internet tools to monitor and react to coverage of high-profile events.

    The U.S. Air Force tracked the instant messaging service Twitter, video carrier YouTube and various blogs to assess the public backlash to the Air Force One flyover of the Statue of Liberty this spring, according to the documents.

    While the attempts at damage control failed — “No positive spin is possible,” one PowerPoint chart reads — the episode opens a window into the tactics for operating in a boundless digital news cycle.

    This new terrain has slippery slopes for the American military. Facebook, MySpace and other social media sites are popular among service members, including those in Iraq and Afghanistan who want to keep in touch with friends and family. The sites are also valued by military organizations for recruiting or communicating with other federal agencies.

    But posting information on them makes it vulnerable to being lost or stolen, according to Pentagon officials. On Thursday hackers shut down Twitter for several hours, while Facebook had intermittent access problems — an indication of the shortcomings of relying on these services.

    The Marine Corps’ computer network blocks users from accessing social media sites, which service officials say expose “information to adversaries” and provide “an easy conduit for information leakage.”

    That prohibition might extend to other parts of the U.S. military pending a top-level review ordered in late July by Deputy Defence Secretary Bill Lynn. In a memo, Lynn said such sites are important tools but more study is needed to understand their threats and benefits.

    Air Force officials are already aware of the potential benefits.

    According to the Air Force One documents released through the Freedom of Information Act, a unit called the Combat Information Cell at Tyndall Air Force Base in the U.S. state of Florida monitored the public fallout from the April 27 flight over the Statue of Liberty and offered recommendations for dealing with the fast-breaking story.

    The presidential plane took off for New York from Andrews Air Force in the state of Maryland accompanied by two F-16 jet fighters. The purpose of the flight, which wasn’t publicly announced, was to get new photos of the specially modified Boeing 747 with the statue in the background.

    The mission became a public relations disaster as panicked New Yorkers, fearing another 9/11-style attack, emptied office buildings. In the aftermath, Louis Caldera, director of the White House military office that authorized the flight, was fired.

    The Combat Information Cell’s first assessment of the event said “Web site blog comments ‘furious’ at best.” Local reporting of the flyover was “very critical, highlighting scare factor,” it added.

    A Twitter search revealed a rate of one “tweet” per minute about a pair of F-16s chasing a commercial airliner. A tweet is a text message of up to 140 characters delivered to the author’s subscribers, who are known as followers.

    Media coverage over the next 24 hours “will focus on local hysteria and lack of public notification,” the cell predicted. “Blogs will continue to be overwhelmingly negative.”

    “Damage control requires timely counter-information,” but the opportunity for that had passed, the assessment said. The cell recommended acknowledging the mistake and ensuring it didn’t happen again.

    An update on April 28 said the story was still “reverberating, surprisingly resilient.” The tweet rate had grown to three per minute and the words “New York” had been pushed into Twitter’s high-frequency topic category. Videos of the event posted on YouTube had been viewed more than 260,000 times, it said.

    1st Air Force spokesman Al Eakle explained that the command had no role in planning or co-ordinating the Air Force One flight. But the units tracked social networks and blog traffic “to obtain what lessons we might learn so as not to repeat them in the future.” The assessments were sent to the command’s leadership so they’d know how the public was reacting, he added.

    John Verdi of the Electronic Privacy Information Center in Washington said gray zones can emerge while monitoring social networking sites because participating is based on trust.

    “Lots of times individuals upload private or sensitive information that they expect to share with their friends or family and not the whole Internet world,” Verdi said. “It would certainly be a major problem if the government were accessing that information under false pretenses.”

    Paul Bove, an Air Force digital media strategist, said service personnel are instructed not to do that. Nor are they to use aliases or represent a position that’s beyond the scope of what they do.

    “We always tell people, ‘Stay in your lane and don’t talk about something that you’re not qualified to talk about,”‘ Bove said.

    Source

    Published in: on August 12, 2009 at 12:36 am  Comments Off  
    Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
    Follow

    Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

    Join 273 other followers