Zebra 3 Report by Joe Anybody
Sunday, 31 May 2009
How Long Does It TAke Me to Make A One Hour Video
Mood:  energetic
Now Playing: Time estimates for shooting a hour video to the final completed video on the Internet
Topic: MEDIA
task for one full hour tape hours additional 
Filming event for one hour 1   
Uploading complete tape to computer 1   
Basic: cleanup, slight edit, titles 1   
Standard: extra editing, music, texts  1 
Deluxe: splices, inserting, elaborate mixes   1+ 
Review all edits- watch in full entirity 1   
corrections, additions, fixes, review fixes 0.5   
save final version to computer 2   
watch review, check before distrubution 1   
Upload to Web Server  2   
Review quality of upload to server (light scan) 0.5   
Write/Promote/share in text format about video 1+   
Post embedded video on websites, blogs, Internet 1+   
      
  12 hours 13 -14 hours 
      
      
      
       

Posted by Joe Anybody at 11:43 PM PDT
Thursday, 21 May 2009
GITMO will be closing, so says Obama
Mood:  caffeinated
Now Playing: Closing Guantanamo - Obama sticks to his word
Topic: TORTURE

Obama says:

 US prisons tough enough for detainees

President Barack Obama delivers an address on national security, terrorism, and the closin...

By STEVEN R. HURST, AP
Thu May 21, 12:32 PM EDT

President Barack Obama forcefully defended his plans to close the Guantanamo detention camp Thursday and said some of the terror suspects held there would be brought to top-security prisons in the United States despite fierce opposition in Congress.

He spoke one day after the Senate voted resoundingly to deny him money to close the prison, and he decried "fear-mongering" that he said had led to such opposition.

He insisted the transfer would not endanger Americans and promised to work with lawmakers to develop a system for holding detainees who can't be tried and can't be turned loose from the Navy-run prison in Cuba.

"There are no neat or easy answers here," Obama said in a speech in which he pledged anew to clean up what he said was "quite simply a mess" at Guantanamo that he had inherited from the Bush administration.

Moments after Obama concluded, former Vice President Dick Cheney delivered his own address across town defending the decisions of the Bush administration in dealing with terrorism. Expressing no remorse for the actions the Bush White House had ordered, Cheney said under the same circumstances he would make the same decisions "without hesitation."

Obama noted that roughly 500 detainees already had been released by the Bush administration. There are 240 at Guantanamo now. The president said that 50 of those had been cleared to be sent to other countries — although he did not identify which countries might be willing to take them.

Obama conceded that some Guantanamo detainees would end up in U.S. prisons and said those facilities were tough enough to house even the most dangerous inmates.

Obama decried arguments used against his plans.

"We will be ill-served by the fear-mongering that emerges whenever we discuss this issue," he declared.

Speaking at the National Archives, Obama said he wouldn't do anything to endanger the American people.

He said opening and continuing the military prison "set back the moral authority that is America's strongest currency in the world."

Obama spoke in front of a copy of the Constitution, to members of the Judge Advocate General's Corps, diplomatic, policy and development officials and representatives of civil liberties groups.

"I can tell you that the wrong answer is to pretend like this problem will go away if we maintain an unsustainable status quo," Obama said. "As president, I refuse to allow this problem to fester. Our security interests won't permit it. Our courts won't allow it. And neither should our conscience."

Obama said his administration was in the process of studying each of the remaining Guantanamo detainees "to determine the appropriate policies for dealing with them."

"Nobody has ever escaped from one of our `supermax' prisons which hold hundreds of convicted terrorists," Obama said.

Obama used the speech as an effort to try to retake the initiative on the matter. He spoke a day after the Senate, led by majority Democrats, followed the lead of the House and voted decisively to deny his request for $80 million to close the prison. Lawmakers said they would block the funds until he gave a more detailed accounting of what would happen to the detainees.

He provided some details in his speech but stopped short of offering specifics on what to do with detainees who won't be tried for war crimes but are likely to be held indefinitely.

He described this group as those "who cannot be prosecuted yet who pose a clear danger to the American people."

"I want to be honest: This is the toughest issue we will face," Obama said.

He said his administration would "exhaust every avenue that we have" to prosecute detainees but there would still be some left "who cannot be prosecuted for past crimes" yet remain a threat.

Among these, he said, are prisoners who have expressed allegiance to Osama bin Laden "or otherwise made it clear they want to kill Americans."

"So going forward, my administration will work with Congress to develop an appropriate legal regime" to handle such detainees "so that our efforts are consistent with our values and our Constitution."

Obama criticized what he said was an effort to politicize the issue.

"I know that the politics in Congress will be difficult. These issues are fodder for 30-second commercials and direct mail pieces that are designed to frighten. I get it. But if we continue to make decisions from within a climate of fear, we will make more mistakes," he said.

Obama said he had no intention of looking back and "relitigating the policies" of the Bush administration.

But at the same time, he strongly criticized former President George W. Bush's actions. "Our government made decisions based upon fear rather than foresight and all too often trimmed facts and evidence to fit ideological predispositions," he said.

"In other words, we went off course."

The president again rejected the idea of an independent commission that would investigate the whole range of national security issues under the Bush administration.

"I recognize that many still have a strong desire to focus on the past. When it comes to the actions of the last eight years, some Americans are angry; others want to re-fight debates that have been settled, most clearly at the ballot box in November," Obama said.

"I know that these debates lead directly to a call for a fuller accounting, perhaps through an independent commission," he said. But he insisted that "our existing democratic institutions are strong enough to deliver accountability."

He also defended his decision to try to block the court-ordered release of detainee abuse photos. "Release would inflame anti-American opinion" and threaten American soldiers serving in Iraq and Afghanistan, Obama said. His decision against releasing the photos has been criticized by human-rights groups.

Obama had first suggested he would allow the photos to be released, but changed his mind after listening to advice from the military and intelligence advisers.

On another recent controversy, he defended his decision to release CIA interrogation memos, saying there was "no overriding reason to protect them." He said the interrogation methods, which included waterboarding, were already known — and that he had banned them.

Cheney praised Obama for two "wise" decisions — his handling of the war in Afghanistan and his decision to try to block the court-ordered release of detainee-abuse photos. "He deserves our support" for such actions, Cheney said.

But, the former vice president said, the current administration's actions on Guantanamo and other steps in the war against terrorism "should not be based on slogans and campaign rhetoric, but on a truthful telling of history."

Cheney has become the most outspoken high-ranking Bush official in criticizing the Obama team, suggesting steps the new president has taken have made the country less safe.

Cheney denounced Obama's announcement on his second day in office that he would close Guantanamo. He said the decision came with "little deliberation and no plan."

"Now, the president says some of these terrorists should be brought to American soil for trial in our court system. Others, he says, will be shipped to third countries. But so far, the United States has had little luck getting other countries to take hardened terrorists."

Cheney spoke at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank.


Posted by Joe Anybody at 9:50 AM PDT
Wednesday, 20 May 2009
911 Truth sign holders hassled / arrested. Free Speech Issue
Mood:  irritated
Now Playing: The Truth Hurts - Police Jail those who public desent
Topic: 911 TRUTH
9-11 Conspiracy Theorists Sue St. Louis

By JOE HARRIS
May 12, 2009
Courthouse News Service

ST. LOUIS (CN) - Two 9-11 conspiracy theorists say St. Louis used an unconstitutional ordinance to violate their right to free speech. Donald Stahl and William Demsar say city police arrested them on Feb. 6 for carrying a banner that stated, "911 Was An Inside Job!"

In their federal claim, the men say it was a peaceful protest calling for a new, independent investigation into the federal government's involvement into the events of September 11, 2001. The men say they were not blocking pedestrian or vehicular traffic.

They say police arrested them and destroyed their sign based on an ordinance that states: "No person shall sell or offer for sale any goods or merchandise, display any sign or pictures, participate in or conduct an exhibition or demonstration, talk, sing or play music on any street or abutting premises, or alley in consequences of which there is such a gathering of persons or stopping of vehicles as to impede either pedestrians or vehicular traffic."

Stahl and Demsar say the law is vague and overbroad, fails to provide alternatives for speech and lends itself to arbitrary enforcement. They want the city enjoined from enforcing it. They are represented by Anthony Rothert with the American Civil Liberties Union.

Full text of COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

RELATED:

9-11 Conspiracy Theorists Sue St. Louis City
By Chad Garrison in News
May 14, 2009
Riverfront Times Blog

Two 9-11 conspiracy theorists are suing St. Louis City over an ordinance they say is unconstitutional.

Donald Stahl and William Demsar were arrested on February 6 for holding a sign reading "9-11 Was an Inside Job" from a pedestrian bridge over Interstate 55 just south of downtown.

According to their complaint filed in federal court, the two were approached by a police officer and told to leave the bridge. When they refused, they were arrested and the sign and frame allegedly destroyed.

ACLU attorney Anthony Rothert is representing Stahl and Demsar in the suit which contends that a city ordinance that prohibits the selling of goods, diplaying of signs, talking, singing or playing music near any street so as to impede traffic is unconstitutional under the First Amendment guaranteeing free speech.

The plaintiffs are seeking that the law be repealed and that they be rewarded for their court costs.

Posted by Joe Anybody at 12:01 AM PDT
Tuesday, 19 May 2009
History tells us the answer - Are we too dumb to understand it?
Mood:  accident prone
Now Playing: IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN - Give Up The Occupation of Afghanistan
Topic: WAR

The Mother of All War Zones

 

By Nikki Gloudeman | Wed May 6, 2009 1:07 PM PSThttp://www.motherjones.com/print/23373 328 BC—Alexander the Great forms Hellenistic state in portions of what is now Afghanistan.400 AD—White Huns invade region, dominate for two centuries.642—After sacking Persia, Arab armies invade and attempt to introduce Islam.870—Dawn of the Saffarid dynasty, whose expansive empire competes with two others for control of the wider region.998—Turkic dynasty cements Islamic era.1219—Genghis Khan leads Mongol invasion.Late 14th century—Tamerlane, Khan's descendent, brings Afghanistan into his Asian empire.1738—Nadir Shah and his Iranian army take Kandahar and Kabul.1747—After Shah is assassinated, Afghans convene a loya jirga—grand council of factions—and name a king, Ahmad Shah Durrani. The new king embarks on an imperialist rampage, eventually conquering all of modern-day Afghanistan and parts of Iran and India.1772—His empire waning, Durrani dies and turf battles ensue; by 1818 his inept successors control little more than Kabul.1839—First Anglo-Afghan War: British forces invade to prop up a Durrani successor. Upon retreat, they are massacred.1878—Second Anglo-Afghan War: Brits take over and install a chieftain they can deal with.1919—Third Anglo-Afghan War ends in Treaty of Rawalpindi; Brits recognize Afghan independence.1933—Mohammad Zahir Shah takes the throne. Although he doesn't rule the country in practice, his relatively peaceful 40-year reign earns him the title "father of the nation" in the current constitution.1934—US recognizes Afghanistan.1947—Partition: British colonial turf divided, leading to bad blood between Afghanistan and its newly created neighbor, Pakistan, as well as a Pakistan-India military rivalry.1966—Afghanistan signs the Convention on the Political Rights of Women, ensuring a woman's right to vote and hold public office.1973—King Zahir Shah's disgruntled cousin, Sardar Mohammad Daoud, stages a coup while the king is overseas. Daoud declares Afghanistan a republic with himself as president.1978—The People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA), an Afghan communist faction, seizes power and slaughters Daoud and his family. Led by communist president Nur Muhammad Taraki, the new government signs a friendship treaty with Moscow.1979—Former prime minister Hafizullah Amin snatches the reins, executes Taraki, and begins slaughtering PDPA members. Three months later, Soviet forces roll into Kabul, execute Amin, and install a new prime minister.1980—Regional factions in Afghanistan and Pakistan team up to resist the Soviets. They call themselves mujahideen, "those who engage in jihad."March 21, 1982—President Ronald Reagan proclaims the date Afghanistan Day and lauds mujahideen as "freedom fighters…defending principles of independence and freedom that form the basis of global security and stability."1984—US begins funneling billions of dollars, plus weapons and training, to the mujahideen. The biggest beneficiary is Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, a religious zealot whom one former professor called a "psychopath" due to his acid attacks and beatings of female students at Kabul University.1986—Mohammad Najibullah, former head of the secret police, becomes president.1987—In Bond flick The Living Daylights, heroic Afghan freedom fighters help 007 defeat the Evil Empire.1988—Anti-Soviet jihadist Osama bin Laden joins with fellow Islamic hardliners to form Al Qaeda. Pakistan, Afghanistan, America, Soviet Union sign Geneva peace accords, guaranteeing Afghan independence and withdrawal of 100,000 Soviet troops.April 1992—After Najibullah is ousted by the Afghan military, mujahideen take over Kabul and impose strict laws—including a ban on booze.June 1992—Tajik leader Burhanuddin Rabbani becomes interim president, but mujahideen infighting disintegrates into civil war, prompting Kabul residents to flee en masse.1993—Fighting among the warlord factions leaves tens of thousands of civilians dead or wounded.1994—During his brief stint as prime minister, the US-funded Hekmatyar orders shelling of Kabul, reportedly killing more than 25,000. With backing from ISI, Pakistan's military-intelligence branch, Islamic theological students form fundamentalist Taliban militia.1995—Taliban on the rise across the country. Relieved for a bit of peace, Afghans welcome the militants.September 1996—Taliban takes over Kabul and promptly crack down on the arts and public participation by women. A strict new dress code mandates burkas; men must wear beards. Violators are flogged.1998—A vengeful god? Earthquakes in February and May leave more than 6,000 Afghans dead. In June, severe flooding kills another 6,000. A four-year nationwide drought ensues, saddling poppy farmers with salaam debt, which obliges them to sell future opium harvests to their creditors at bargain-basement prices.October 1999—UN orders Taliban to turn over bin Laden. Taliban Foreign Minister Mohammed Hassan Akhund responds, "No proof came from anyone, especially America, that Osama was involved in terrorist activities."March 2001—Taliban destroys ancient cliff Buddhas at Bamiyan, provoking international outrage.May 2001—Taliban orders Hindus to wear tags identifying themselves as non-Muslims.September 9, 2001—Taliban militants posing as TV reporters detonate camera bomb, assassinating Northern Alliance chief Ahmad Shah Massoud.September 11, 2001—The horror. Pentagon soon embarks on war plans for Afghanistan—and Iraq.October 2, 2001—President Bush orders the Taliban to surrender bin Laden. Taliban ambassador Abdul Salam Zaeef demurs, "Where is the evidence? Where is the proof?"October 7, 2001—US launches Afghan bombing campaign with support from Australia, Canada, England, France, Germany, Italy, and New Zealand.December 2001—UN brokers Bonn Agreement to establish a new government and convene an emergency loya jirga. US and British forces swarm the mountains of Tora Bora after radio intercepts indicate bin Laden is hiding there. Some 200 Qaeda and Taliban fighters die, but no bin Laden. Mullah Mohammed Omar, leader of the Taliban, is also AWOL.January 2002—Bush State of the Union: Iraq, Iran, North Korea = Axis of Evil.March 2003—US and British forces invade Iraq.January 2004—Bush State of the Union: "The men and women of Afghanistan are building a nation that is free and proud and fighting terror—and America is honored to be their friend."September 2004—In the preceding six months, reports the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission, at least 123 women set themselves on fire to escape forced marriages and domestic violence—13 lived.October 2004—Roughly 8.2 million Afghans vote in country's first presidential election. America's favorite, Hamid Karzai, wins by a landslide.June 2005—Sher Mohammed Akhundzada is removed as governor of Helmand province after 9,000 kilos of opium are found at his offices.December 2005—President Karzai appoints Akhundzada to serve in the Afghan senate.Late 2005—CIA unit dedicated to hunting bin Laden shuts down.October 2006—In "Germany's Abu Ghraib," photos surface of that nation's soldiers kissing, posing with, and making pyramids out of skulls and bones in Afghanistan.November 2006—Government Accountability Office estimates that putting a dent in Afghan poppy cultivation and drug trafficking will take at least a decade.January 2007—Taliban announces new schools to teach Islam to boys.Spring 2007—Afghan poppy farmers reap record harvest: 8.2 million kilos of raw opium, enough to satisfy 93 percent of the illicit global market.September 2007—More than 100,000 textbooks traveling from Kabul to Kandahar and Nooristan provinces are seized and burned by anti-government forces.December 2007—Year's toll: 751 US soldiers wounded (an 87 percent jump) and 117 dead. Back home, moviegoers flock to see Tom Hanks and Julia Roberts in Charlie Wilson's War, dramatizing America's covert support of mujahideen.May 2008—Monthly US fatalities in Afghanistan surpass those in Iraq—even though America has nearly five times fewer troops in Afghanistan.July 2008—Faulty US air strike demolishes wedding in Nangarhar mountains, leaving around 50 dead. Four months later, in Kandahar, US bombs ruin another wedding party.September 2008—Lamenting America's paltry development aid to Afghanistan, Joint Chiefs chairman Admiral Michael Mullen complains to the House Armed Services Committee, "We can't kill our way to victory."October 2008—Sarah Palin name-drops "our neighboring country of Afghanistan" at a San Francisco fundraiser.November 2008—Taliban militants embarrass coalition forces by driving around in American Humvees stolen from more than a dozen hijacked supply trucks; Karzai appears before the UN Security Council, seeking a timeline for coalition withdrawal.January 2009—Karzai: Mounting civilian casualties "strengthening the terrorists."February 2009—BBC/ABC poll: Karzai's popularity waning, and 73 percent of Afghans oppose any increase in foreign troops. CNN poll: 63 percent of Americans support Obama's plan to send in 17,000 more soldiers.March 2009—Glimpses of Obama's strategy: In addition to the 17,000 troops, he'll provide 4,000 new trainers to get Afghan cops and soldiers up to speed, meaningful funding for aid and diplomacy, a regional approach that involves friends and foes (perhaps even Taliban elements), and $7.5 billion in development assistance to win hearts and minds in Pakistan's nettlesome tribal areas. The approach is praised by Karzai and Pakistani president Asif Ali Zardari.April 2009—Pakistan's Zardari, hoping to quell his country's own Taliban insurgency, signs a bill that puts six districts, including the former resort area of Swat Valley, under Shariah law—a strict Islamic interpretation that denies the rights of women and often metes out punishments Westerners consider barbaric.Nikki Gloudeman is a senior fellow at Mother Jones.http://www.motherjones.com/print/23373 Mother Jones  

Posted by Joe Anybody at 12:01 AM PDT
Wednesday, 13 May 2009
US accused of using 'illegal' white phosphorus
Mood:  sad
Now Playing: US accused of using 'illegal' white phosphorus in chemical attack that killed Afghan civilians
Topic: WAR

Z3 Readers you already knew about this, this pisses me off and is an illegal use of war (sic)technology, we (The USA) will be paying dearly for these atrocities.

 

US accused of using 'illegal' white phosphorus in chemical attack that killed Afghan civilians

 

Published on 05-11-2009 
 

Source: Daily Mail

Warning: Afghan President Hamid Karzai is 'very serious' about a demand for foreign forces in Afghanistan to halt air raids

Warning: Afghan President Hamid Karzai is 'very serious' about a demand for foreign forces in Afghanistan to halt air raids

Afghan president Hamid Karzai has called for an end to air raids in his country after scores of civilians were killed in the latest attack on the Taliban.

Karzai, who went on U.S. television to make the call has put the death toll at up to 130 people.

If his figure is confirmed, it would be the biggest such case of Western forces killing civilians since they invaded in 2001.

His spokesman said the Afghan leader was 'very serious' about his demand.

Afghans are furious about the bombing of two villages in Western Farah province during a drawn-out battle last week, when homes full of civilians were hit.

However, his plea was rejected by White House National Security Adviser James Jones, who said the United States could not be expected to fight 'with one hand tied behind our back'.

But an issue that is already poisoning ties between Washington and Kabul may become even more toxic, as Karzai's team showed no signs of backing away from their demand to end attacks which they say undermine the government's legitimacy.

'We demand a complete end to the bombardment of our villages ... and we are very serious about it,' said presidential spokesman Siymak Herawi, when asked about Jones's comments.

'They are like a double-edged weapon with which the international community is hurting itself and also the Afghan people,' he added.

Demonstration: Afghan students of Kabul University protest against the coalition air strikes

Demonstration: Afghan students of Kabul University protest against the coalition air strikes which have reportedly killed up to 130 civilians

Karzai’s warning comes after the U.S. was accused of using white phosphorus bombs during the raids.

Doctors say they found horrific burns on victims of the slaughter a week ago.

They believe they could have been caused by the chemical, which bursts into fierce fire on contact with the air and can stick to flesh and burn deep into it.

While phosphorus can be legitimately used in battle to light up the night sky or create smokescreens, but it is illegal to use it as a weapon.

Human rights groups say its use in populated areas can indiscriminately burn civilians and constitutes a war crime.

Yesterday the U.S. military denied using phosphorus, saying if it had been used, the Taliban were to blame. But that idea was rubbished by experts and denied by the Taliban themselves.

Haji Barkat Ullah speaks with his daughter Frishta, aged seven, who was wounded in a coalition air strike in Afghanistan last week

Haji Barkat Ullah speaks with his daughter Frishta, aged seven, who was wounded in a coalition air strike in Afghanistan last week

Anger over casualties from aerial bombings has been eroding support for troops on the ground. They accounted for well over half of civilian deaths caused by Western and pro-government forces in 2008, according to the United Nations.

Hundreds of Kabul university students marched on Sunday chanting 'death to America' in protest against the killings.

Army General David Petraeus, who as head of U.S. Central Command oversees military operations in Afghanistan, said he had assigned a brigadier general to look at the use of air strikes.

Petraeus said it was important to ensure 'that our tactical actions don't undermine our strategic goals and objectives'.

Karzai's spokesman Herawi said the raids were not producing a substantial impact on a Taliban insurgency that has been gathering strength across the south and east of the country.

A white phosphorus shell fired by the Israeli military explodes over the Gaza strip earlier this year. The chemical ignites on contact with the air, and causes severe burns. The US is accused of using the weapon illegally in Afghanistan

A white phosphorus shell fired by the Israeli military explodes over the Gaza strip earlier this year. The chemical ignites on contact with the air, and causes severe burns. The US is accused of using the weapon illegally in Afghanistan

Despite reinforcements to foreign forces, violence has surged to its worst level in the past year, the bloodiest period since U.S.-led troops overthrew the Taliban government in 2001.

'Our houses and villages are not havens for terrorists. The havens of terrorists are on the other side of the border,' he said alluding to neighbouring Pakistan.

'If they want the campaign against terrorism to produce result, then they should pay attention to the nests of terrorism, not to our houses and villages.'

But analysts say U.S. and Nato-led troops would be unlikely to agree to fight without air power, because they are spread relatively thinly across Afghanistan.


Posted by Joe Anybody at 12:01 AM PDT
Monday, 11 May 2009
Peace Vigil on Mothers Day = rightwingers start the name calling
Mood:  loud
Now Playing: Mothers Day - Silent Vigil For Peace - My comment on a news blog
Topic: PROTEST!
Hi Z3'ers
The following is a comment I posted on the Oregonian's Website
There were lots of crappy comments on the site so I jumped in
Of course I was there at this vigil, and my film link is included below.
I was commenter 122.
Posted by JoeAnybody on 05/11/09 at 7:40PM

Boy there is sure a lot of people on this comment page that:

1>hate others and are proud to be public about their hate of others.
2>use derogatory (hate speech) statements. 3>prefer "killing over peace".
4>criticize free speech when they don’t agree. 5>resort to name calling and ad-hominem attack. 6>display mean spirited condemnation to mothers who want peace on earth.
7>lies and political smears
8>use very uneducated comments.
9>encourage violence and promote the USA using violence for faux reasons.
10>cant stand the idea of "peace" nor do they understand it (or care to) so they discourage and try to shame mothers who want peace.
11>advocate using guns and death as the answer. 12>trup that "they are real Americans and Patriots, while stepping on a fellow Americans back to put him down.

What a sad shame to see developing, it is brewing HATE!

I’m glad that no "patriots" showed up to cause a negative scene, or to hurt anyone. I did see massive people walking around who seemed to care less about this war and the death its is causing.

A million dead Iraqi’s, many women & children and people have the nerve to chastise moms who don’t want more blood shed? Is this the twilight zone?

Save your left wing crap talk (I voted for Nader)
So all the "savior" crap or see what your vote has got you is not even pertinent to me.

I also challenge every big mouth who commented here to "crap talk the silent vigil for peace" to tell me what "your doing to bring peace on this earth? And shooting people in Iraq wont count.

So do tell me what your doing, I will even give you air time on YouTube. Now step up ...

Meanwhile check out this video I made FOR PEACE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QjPmSaeM6o
"Mothers Day Silent Peace Vigil May 10 09 We will not be silent"

And before you just use ad-hominem attacks on me, realize that I started to wise up 4 years ago when I heard that my cousin who was the highest ranking officer (Col.) in Iraq to so far die ...

He shot himself in the head Bagdad in 2005 ... when he wrote in his last note to his commander Petrus. ... he said (quote)"I didn't come here (from West Point) for greed, killing and destruction, I will not be sullied no more, death before dishonor".

Heck what do you think he was telling Petrus? What did he mean when he said "Your only concerned with your careers" As he shot himself he left a wife an 3 kids behind. Well it also changed my life I heard exactly his point and forgive me ...but I want the killings to end.

I want peace, I want the greed and corruption to stop, I want love and understanding. My cousin was a brilliant man, he was a professor at West point he studied and taught “The Ethic’s of War” So if people like him are x-ing themselves out, do any of you care? I know the peace movement cares, but why is their such a wall of people who encourage more blood … more death, and get angry because of people like me and these mothers who want a better world for all of us? At least try to understand what we are saying.

Suicides are at a point where more US soldiers and vets are dieing from their own demise, than the war itself. This is a horrible mistake for the US to be over there in a never ending blood bath, which has now caused 5 million Iraqi’s to be refugees and sent a million into their graves, theses are women and children folks ...can you wrap your mind around that? Thousands of women and children are dead (HELLO!?)

Look at today’s news a soldier shoots 5 of his fellow comrades. You know why …IT INSANE over in the hell zone of battle … killing is insane …its driving people into the depths of hell… and now we have a “cheerleading squad out here wanting MORE” and the whole time berating mothers on Mothers Day that want their children home and peace around the world.

Anyone want to tell me what your doing "for peace on this earth"?
I am really interested: contact me
But to just bash and crap talk on the web don’t waste my time... I’m trying to stop a war right now. I am filming the people in this world that want peace.


Posted by Joe Anybody at 8:08 PM PDT
Saturday, 9 May 2009
Children ask Rice about USA Torture
Mood:  cheeky
Now Playing: Children know best - Rice scrambles to stem torture talk at school event
Topic: TORTURE

 Z3 Readers check this article out. I had heard a young kid at a school had asked Condi Rice a torture question... well it was more than "one question" ... read here how Rice was "grilled" and how she "tries to" control the questioning with 911 SCARE tactics and "tough" 'We Dont Torture' .... problem was this child and me and millions other all "know better" .... this is an excellent account of one small kid standing up to the crime family of America and the torture provocateurs

---------------------------

Babes in Torture Land

---------------------------

http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/139896/babes_in_torture_land%3A_it_took_a_bunch_of_kids_to_grill_condi_the_way_the_media_should_have/?page=entire

Yell

It Took a Bunch of Kids to Grill Condi the Way the Media Should Have

By Rory O'Connor, MediaChannel.org. Posted May 7, 2009. 

On April 6, 1977, David Frost was having a particularly difficult time interviewing former President Richard Nixon. Frost's colleague James Reston, Jr. suggested a new line of questioning, one used earlier in the trial of former Nixon aide John Ehrlichman: Were there no limits to what a president can do, even if it's plainly illegal? Could he do anything despite the law?

 

"If the president does it,that means it's not illegal," Nixon notoriously replied, arguing, "that in war time, a president does have certain extraordinary powers which would make acts that would otherwise be unlawful, lawful if undertaken for the purpose of preserving the nation and the Constitution"

 

While speaking recently at Stanford University, where she steadfastly defended the Bush Administration's "enhanced interrogation" policies, ex-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice revealed herself to be a Summa Cum Laude graduate of the Richard M. Nixon School of Government.

 

"We did not torture anyone," Rice told the Stanford students. "The president instructed us that nothing we would do would be outside of our obligations, legal obligations, under the Convention Against Torture And so, by definition, if it was authorized by the president, it did not violate our obligations under the Convention Against Torture."

 

From Nixon to Bush and beyond, such contentions have seemingly passed muster with large swaths of both America's citizenry and its press. Now, however, challenges are finally emerging to such dangerous and unconstitutional ideas -- albeit from some unlikely sources. Have you ever heard the saying, for example, "Out of the mouths of babes?" Biblical in origin, the phrase is most often used when truth bubbles up unexpectedly -- such as when a young person says something that surprises because it shows what we expect to be an adult's wisdom and understanding

 

And so it was recently in our nation's capital, as Secretary Rice made "her first Washington appearance since leaving office" to speak to students at the Jewish Primary Day School -- only to be pressed once again on the troublesome topic of torture, just days after telling the Stanford undergraduates that the gruesome form of torture euphemistically known as waterboarding was "by definition" legal "if it was authorized by the president."

 

After years of facing softballs from a doting Washington press corps, Rice must have been taken aback as she fielded still more questions about torture -- from a 4th-Grader no less! As reported in the Washington Post, Rice "held forth amiably before a few dozen students about her love of Israel, travel abroad and the importance of learning languages" before opening the floor to their questions. The inquiries, developed by students with the assistance of their teachers, had not been screened in advance by Rice.

 

"At first, they were innocuous," noted Post Staff Reporter Alec MacGillis. "What was it like growing up in segregated Birmingham, Ala.? What skill did she want to be best known for?"

 

Then a fourth-grader named Misha Lerner asked a tough one: what did Rice think about the things President Obama's administration had been saying concerning methods used by the previous administration to get information from detainees? (According to Misha's mother, Inna, her son had originally come up with an even tougher question: "If you would work for Obama's administration, would you push for torture?" But Misha's teachers apparently acted as editors: "They wanted him to soften it and take out the word 'torture,'" Ms. Lerner explained. "But the essence of it was the same.")

 

"Let me just say that President Bush was very clear that he wanted to do everything he could to protect the country," Rice responded. "After September 11, we wanted to protect the country. But he was also very clear that we would do nothing, nothing, that was against the law or against our obligations internationally. So the president was only willing to authorize policies that were legal in order to protect the country."

 

Rice's response to the Babes in TortureLand echoed what she had said earlier at Stanford, while pleading for sympathy: "I hope you understand that it was a very difficult time. We were all so terrified of another attack on the country." Nevertheless, she reiterated, "Even under those most difficult circumstances, the president was not prepared to do something illegal"

 

Despite her contention, one student still demanded, "How are we supposed to continue promoting America as this guiding light of democracy and how are we supposed to win hearts and minds in the world as long as we continue with these actions?"

 

"Well, first of all, you do what's right," Rice replied. "That's the most important thing -- that you make a judgment of what's right.

 

"And I'll tell you something," she continued. "Unless you were there in a position of responsibility after September 11th, you cannot possibly imagine the dilemmas that you faced in trying to protect Americans. And I know a lot of people are second-guessing now, but let me tell you what second-guessing would really have hurt me -- if the second-guessing had been about 3,000 more Americans dying because we didn't do everything we could to protect them." Apparently when you're in that position of responsibility, it helps to be 'tough-minded" like Bush and Rice.

 

"Foreign policy is full of tough choices. Very tough choices," Rice explained. "The world is not a bunch of easy choices in which you get to make ones that always feel good."

 

Rice's student questioner then pointed out that our government had never resorted to torture, "Even in World War II, as we faced Nazi Germany -- probably the greatest threat that America has ever faced."

 

She quickly shot back, "And we didn't torture anybody here either. Alright?"

 

"Is waterboarding torture?" the student then asked.

 

"I just said -- the United States was told, we were told, nothing that violates our obligations under the Convention Against Torture," Rice maintained. "And so, by definition, if it was authorized by the president, it did not violate our obligations under the Conventions Against Torture."

 

Yes, but is waterboarding torture? And if so, is it illegal -- even when the president condones it? Or are there no limits to what a president can do, even if it's patently illegal? Can the president do anything despite the law? Unless someone in the Obama Administration soon starts asking uncomfortable questions like those coming out of the mouths of babes like Misha Lerner, the Nixon/Bush/Rice position that we live in a nation ruled by men -- and not laws - may yet prevail.


Posted by Joe Anybody at 1:13 PM PDT
PD- 100 Black Hornet
Mood:  d'oh
Now Playing: technology for military use - spy drone copters
Topic: WAR

The Next Tool for the CIA: Helicopters That Fit in Your Palm

 

Published on 05-06-2009 
 

Source: Discovery Magazine

hornet-3-annonse.jpg

 

 

 

 

Here it is, a 15-gram helicopter that fits in your hand and looks like something out of a James Bond sequence. Except it’s not a movie prop—it’s the PD-100 Black Hornet.

With video cameras for eyes and fully-functional 4-inch rotor blades, the helicopter can lift off the ground in a matter of seconds and fly at 20 miles per hour. A built-in GPS system allows it to carefully navigate outdoor terrain without getting lost. Tests have shown that it can even handle windy conditions.

If the Norwegian company Prox Dynamics successfully manufactures the Hornet as planned, soldiers might soon begin to use them on the battlefield. The best part? The tiny aircraft is so small it can fit in their pockets.

 

DARPA also has mini-choppers in the works, but they’re designed to fly indoors only. The agency is also developing ones that look (and fly) more like bugs than aircraft. Black Hornet will most likely beat any competitors to the market—by next year, the company plans on selling the device to any governments and their respective agencies that show interest.

Granted, it’s no Energizer Bunny: The mini-chopper’s batteries only last 30 minutes, so don’t expect any tiny Russian spies buzzing outside your window anytime soon.


Posted by Joe Anybody at 12:01 AM PDT
Drug Slang Talk - Mother Jones shares the lingo the White House uses
Mood:  happy
Now Playing: 20 "Street" Terms From the White House Drug Control Policy Office
Topic: ANYBODY * ANYDAY

Z3 Readers check out these words, that I bet ya didnt know stright from the White House Jargon book. Ok well actually, Mother Jones passed them along from this website link here:

http://www.motherjones.com/riff/2009/05/drug-control-policy-offices-helpful-list-drug-street-terms

 

— By Daniel Luzer | Wed May 6, 2009 10:55 AM PST

I've recently had to spend a great deal of time on the Web site of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy. The ONDCP is, frankly, fascinating. It's a source of an incredible amount of information. Of course, it is not always the information you're actually looking for, but it is thrilling all the same.

It contains, for instance, the office's official list of drug street names. Below, let's see what the least drug friendly institution on the planet has decided to let concerned citizens know about the "word on the street." What's today's lingo?

Some of these street names are major revelations. "Bag Bride" is a term to describe a crack smoking prostitute. "Ghostbusting" is apparently the word for searching for white particles in the belief that they are crack. And in a hard to believe disclosure, "Geezin a bit of dee gee" is slang, somewhere, for injecting a drug.

One wonders about the purpose of this sort of list. The site explains that:

The Street Terms database contains over 2,300 street terms that refer to specific drug types or drug activity. The database is used by police officers, parents, treatment providers and others who require a better understanding of drug culture.

Of course, the fact that the street terms can appear on the Web site of Office of Drug Control Policy seems to indicate that these street terms are not exactly top secret. And I pity the person who, in an effort to figure out if his son has a drug problem, consults this page as a guide for terms to use when confronting the issue: "Are you a 'Cabbage head,' son?"

There are some terms here that ONDCP just gets wrong. The list defines "Bump" as "Crack; fake crack; cocaine; boost a high; hit of ketamine ($20)." That's puzzling; the most common definition of the word is simply "to snort cocaine." ONDCP also defines Bong as a "Pipe used to smoke marijuana." Well, not really.

Seriously, the marijuana page alone could be a whole chapter in Nineteen Eighty-Four. It ends with another helpful list of street terms, including: Blunt, Bud, J & Sinsemilla. Sinsemilla. Really?

This whole database of street terms, with its unlimited size, narrow impact, and imperviousness to verification, has "intern project" written all over it; you've got nothing for the intern to do, why not have her update the street terms for drugs? "Seriously, we need more about crystal meth. I hear that's big now." A partial list:

  1. Abandominiums: Abandoned row houses where drugs are used
  2. Author: Doctor who writes illegal prescriptions
  3. Cabbage head: An individual who will use or experiment with any kind of drug
  4. Chasing the tiger: To smoke heroin
  5. Dinosaurs: Populations of heroin users in their forties and fifties
  6. Flame cooking: Smoking cocaine base by putting the pipe over a stove flame
  7. Happy stick: Marijuana and PCP combination
  8. Ice cream habit: Occasional use of drugs
  9. Junkie kits: Glass pipe and copper mesh
  10. Kiddie dope: Prescription drugs
  11. Lipton Tea: Poor quality drugs
  12. Mighty white: A form of crack cocaine that is hard, white, and pure
  13. Nickelonians: Crack addicts
  14. Old navy: Heroin
  15. Panic: Drugs not available
  16. Rock star: Female who trades sex for crack or money to buy crack; a person who uses rock cocaine
  17. Sextasy: Ecstasy used with Viagra
  18. Tecatos: Hispanic heroin addict
  19. Tweaker: Crack user looking for drugs on the floor after a police raid
  20. Woola blunt: Marijuana and heroin combination

View the full 38 pages of street terms here (pdf).


Posted by Joe Anybody at 12:01 AM PDT
Monday, 4 May 2009
Dont Lie To Children.... About THE USA Using Torture
Mood:  crushed out
Now Playing: Rice takes question from 4th-grader on torture - then lies about it
Topic: TORTURE

 GOOD GREIF Z3 Readers....

Rice takes question from 4th-grader on torture

WASHINGTON — Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told Jewish elementary school students that the Bush administration did not use illegal interrogation tactics. Her remarks were in response to a question from Misha Lerner, a fourth-grader at the Jewish Primary Day School of the Nation's Capital, The Washington Post reported Monday.

Rice spoke at the school Sunday before giving a lecture at the Sixth & I Historic Synagogue.

Lerner asked Rice what she thought about the Obama administration's remarks on interrogation methods authorized by its predecessors.

Rice responded that she didn't want to criticize President Barack Obama. But she also said that President George W. Bush assured his administration that "we would do nothing, nothing, that was against the law or against our obligations internationally."

"I hope you understand that it was a very difficult time. We were all so terrified of another attack on the country," she said. "Even under those most difficult circumstances, the president was not prepared to do something illegal, and I hope people understand that we were trying to protect the country."

Last week the former secretary of state told Stanford University students that "we did not torture anyone."


Posted by Joe Anybody at 8:25 PM PDT
Updated: Monday, 4 May 2009 6:26 PM PDT

Newer | Latest | Older

« May 2009 »
S M T W T F S
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31
You are not logged in. Log in
Ben Waiting for it ? Well Look Here!
Robert Lindsay Blog
ZEBRA 3 RAG
Old Blogs Go to Joe's Home Web Site
joe-anybody.com
Underground
Media Underground
Joe's 911 Truth Report
911 TRUTH REPORT

OUTSIDE THE BOX
Alex Ansary