Cindy Sheehan Resigns

Cindy Sheehan has "resigned" from being the
"face" of the anti-war movement in this nation.

This act is not as revealing as her stated
reasons. As reported in CNN, Ms. Sheehan was
reported to have said
"was that Casey did indeed die for nothing ...
killed by his own country which is beholden to
and run by a war machine that even controls what
we think."

Cindy Sheehan is wrong about what her son died
for and who was the killer of her son. The
reality is that there is no escaping the
Jihadists anywhere in the world. They have
attempted to take over nations from Sweden to
Nigeria with the sword. If we do not fight them
elsewhere, we will be fighting them here,
which we may well indeed have to do regardless.

That is no reflection on whether the Iraq war is
justified or administrated properly. But the
underlying ideological zealousness of the
Jihadists have the US "infidels" just as much
in their cross hairs as anyone else, if not more.

However, Cindy Sheehan's identification of a war
machine that controls even what we think in the
US is completely accurate. This war machine was
labeled "The military-industrial complex" in the
late 50's. It implies an economic foundational
relationship between the military and industry.
It is simplified in basic economic terms as the
choice made in dollar expenditure of guns
versus butter.

Someone this year renamed the symbiotic entity
the "military-media-industrial complex."
This is the key that results in the
observation/conclusion of Ms. Sheehan
- "a war machine that even control
what we think..." Yes, the mainstream media
in the US has become the propaganda generator
of this three part system.

Propaganda is the term used in the 60's
pertaining to Russia's new reporting.
These days it has been renamed "spin."
Same thing, different generational
nomenclature.

Cindy Sheehan also realized that she was
in essence used and mislead by her
Democratic party. When her anti-war efforts
served the Democratic party by being the
issue they hoped would initiate the
fracturing of George Bushes stronghold of
support, one crack at a time, she was their
"darling." But when she wanted them to
deliver on stopping the war, what she
expected in return for her tireless
efforts, she was summarily discarded.

No, Cindy, this is not the country
you thought it was, or the country
it used to be. Many Americans on
both sides of the aisle grieve this
great loss.

Regardless of our individual politics,
we all appreciate that you truly
believed wholeheartedly in a
principle and gave you all unselfishly
in behalf of it.

Cindy Sheehan resigns a broken but far
wiser woman.

However, the intelligent civilian knows
that Cindy Sheehan's son enlisted of his
own free will into the US military.
Militaries engage in war. Plain and
simple. He put himself in the position
that ultimately cost him his life.
While it is regrettable, it also was
forseeable. And it was also a price
he himself was willing to pay.

Non Consensual Human Experimentation in North America

The Washington Post of May 28,2007 reveals a plan
for non-consensual human experimentation planned for
20,000 critically injured or ill patients in several
cities in North America, in an article entitled
"Critical Care Without Consent."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/26

The article reads in part:

"The studies are being conducted by the
Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium, a network of
medical centers that do research in Seattle,
Portland, San Diego, Dallas, Birmingham,
Pittsburgh, Milwaukee, Toronto and Ottawa, and in
Iowa and British Columbia" (end of WP quote)


This means that persons found with
conditions applicable to the study found in
"the field", meaning outside of a
hospital setting, will be placed into either the
control group (given the standard treatment) or
the test group (given the new treatment.)

The reason given for the US and Canadian govern-
ments to approve this test for their citizens
and residents is that the conditions of the
patients will be too grave for them to grant
permission. In addition, families of the
critically ill are alleged unable, due to stress,
to make a decision of that magnitude
under pressure when seconds count in saving
lives.

Here are the questions the intelligent
civilian should ask:

1. Who will be making the decisions
as to which patient receives which treatment?

2. Will the patients or their legal
decision makers be informed that they are
participating in a study at the time of
treatment? If not, when.

3. Will the patients remain in the study
after the patient is stabilized, for those
who did not die, and if so, will they have
the right of informed consent at that time?

4. Can a person "opt out" of such a
field trial in advance of finding oneself
in a situation which qualifies you for it?

5. Is a participant obligated to pay the
cost of services for such a study? Or,
should they themselves be paid for being
a participant in the study. The latter
is the standard procedure for
all other medical testing studies.

6. Will the study be fully disclosed to the
public at some point in time without violating
one's privacy.

7. If the outcome of the study is poor, who
will be the legally responsible party for
civil recourse, if necessary, or is immunity
and legal shielding covering this study?

San Diego is listed as one of the cities
whose citizens and residents will be
unwillingly placed in this study. San Diego
is a large military based community which
has primarily 3 medical systems which all
civilians participate in. All have strong
databases.

San Diego is also a large DOD contractors
center. Citizens of San Diego have long
reported being used as Guinea pigs for various
directed energy weapons.

A Homeland Security deputy and an engineer
involved in military technology development
told Civilian Intelligence that the protocol
for testing weapons on civilians is called
"skunk projects" and that they take place
in San Diego and always will.

Non-consensual experimentation is NEVER
acceptable. It takes only seconds, even
in an emergency, to inquire "We are
involved in a large government
approved program for experimental
emergency care. Do you consent to
participate in it?"

As it stands, the person making the
decision of who gets the routine
care and who does not is a key element
not detailed in the press release.
There must be pure objectivity in
this element of the trial. Patients
must be informed as soon as possible.
And there must be a legally recognized
manner to "opt in" or "opt out."

Finally, the intelligent civilian
must focus on the central issue
of whether or not Americans find
it acceptable for the US government
to become our guardians and make
life altering determinations for us
such as that some of us will be
subjected to medical experimentation
without informed consent.

The US had has a history of obtaining medical
information in various unethical ways. First,
the US government imported medical doctors
and their information derived from the Nazi
regime human experimentation horrors
at the end of WWII, in Operation Paperclip.

From that point forward, the US government
has justified all non-consensual human
experimentation. They have "used"
military members, non--consensual prisoners
in custody in the US, and civilians.
Every weapon and technology in development
and production is tested on some US citizens
without their knowledge and or consent
by Defense Contractors with the expressed
approval and support of the US government.

The intelligent civilian realizes that
these are precedents being set each time
citizens are used for experiments
authorized by the government. Therefore,
this trend must be promptly addressed.

DOD binoculars will link soldiers brains with software

http://www.wired.com/gadgets/miscellaneous/news/2007/05/binoculars

Sharon Weinberg has an article in Wired Magazine
from May 1,2007 publicizing upcoming military
technology. The article reported that
binoculars are being designed which interface
with the soldier's brain waves, alerting him
or her to danger that is initially
subconsciously perceived by the frontal lobes
of the brain.

The human brain is electrical and that electrical
activity can be read and deciphered. Apparently,
the DOD has authorized Ms. Weinberger to disclose
what was called "a signature brainwave" for
danger.

This new technology will read the unconscious
signal and relay that back to the soldier to
accelerate the reaction time and decision
making process.

This article indirectly confirms from the DOD
what many people have known for quite a while:
the DOD through DARPA (the classified advanced
weapons development and funding agency) has
been researching methodologies for reading
one's private mind.

This latest disclosure confirms that this
research is well past the "research" stage.
DARPA is now constructing technologies that
will actually apply mind reading.

Big Brother has just gotten bigger. This
is Big Brother on steriods.

This is just the beginning of the
public revelation of the military realm
of (brain) neural-computer interfacing
and remote mind reading of even
pre-conscious and unconscious thoughts.

The intelligent civilian should be paying
very close attention to this research.

Stay tuned for further developments.

DailyTech - Bloggers to Receive Similar Legal Protection as Journalists

DailyTech - Bloggers to Receive Similar Legal Protection as Journalists

The Daily Tech reported:
"A new bill being pushed by U.S. Congressmen
Rick Boucher and Mike Pence along with other
House representatives aims to change a few
rules and give the same protection to bloggers
that journalists receive. As the law exists today,
bloggers are open to attack by large corporate
entities that have vast resources "

This legislation should be supported for
several reasons. First, Journalism is not
a licensed profession. Defining a journalist
therefore is somewhat broad.

Blogging is journalism by virtue of the fact
that people rely on for blogs for news and
information. Futher, blogs make an impact on
current events and society and not merely
convey information. Lastly, money is generated
in the Blogosphere thereby defining it as a
business rather than a hobby. IRS criteria
would agree if it were applicable.

The Internet has been a revolutionary virtual
society where freedom in a very pure sense can
manifest in a unique way. Freedom of information
is the cornerstone of this special experience
and should be enabled.

Legal protections for bloggers are necessary
for the continuation of the groundswell
of information that the Blogosphere provides.
Protection of sources is critical for factual
content to continue to emerge without
self-censorship, editorial
management decisions, and the spawning of an
industry of blog related personal lawsuits.

There are other options instead of litigation
for those offended or distressed about
blogging content.

Sites such as "Reputation Defender" have
emerged to address issues of negative internet
blog information about your company or your
person. They will monitor the internet for all
references to the client and respond in their
behalf.

The most important benefit to society that
will be derived from the legislation proposed
for the protection of sources of blogged
information will be that more truth will be
available to the public.

Some will say that more libel and slander will
be available as well. It's a matter of seeing
the glass half full or half empty.

Intelligent civilians see the glass half full.

BBC NEWS | Americas | LA police reassigned over clashes

BBC NEWS | Americas | LA police reassigned over clashes

It is quite a surprise to find an outcome
of prompt administrative action following
the May Day Immigration demonstration in
Los Angeles by the LA Chief of Police.
California police rarely receive anything
but full and public support for any actions
they take, including shooting unarmed citizens
for reasons which sometimes cannot be even be
determined.

California has special laws which protect
police from public disclosure of all matters
of regarding police misconduct. Most beatings
and shootings, even those resulting in the
deaths of non-suspects, are closed to scrutiny
of the public and media. This denial of public
and media access to information has been
upheld through civil litigation by media.

Many organizations have been established by
citizens to attempt to address this problem.
Two examples are CaliforniansAware.org and
copwatch.org.

What I find of particular note is the fact
one of the national experts in less-than-lethal
weapons (which rubber bullets fall under)
is a member of the LAPD. He collaborates with
the military in the development of their
training programs and is recognized for his
expertise nationwide. It doesn't surprise me
that less-than-lethal weapons were liberally
administered to the crowd. What does surprise
me is the political clout this demonstration
garnished. For without it, there would not have
been anything more than a one minute press
justification statement read and case closed.

The between the lines message here is that
the immigration issue is something that is
a political princess and not to be trifled
with.

LA's history has been to find the officers of
gross abuses such as the Rodney King gang
bang beating by cops innocent of any
wrongdoing, even in a court of California
law. This is something new and different.

A top ranking officer was demoted and sixty!
officers were reassigned. Historical indeed.

It's a major political development.
I hope such swift and appropriate discipline
for law enforcement misconduct spreads
throughout the entire State of California
for the benefit of its legal citizens,too.

The Politics Behind the Immigration Movement

Contrary to superficial appearances,
the issue of providing a legal means for
the estimated 8 million illegal immigrants
currently in the United States to become
United States citizens is not the issue
portrayed on banners and news sound bites.

These 8 million people in the US illegally
occupy the South Western states primarily.
Most heavily inhabited are California,
Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas.

In terms of voting and representation,
Arizona and Texas are Republican states.
While California is a Democratic state, the
lower areas of the state which include Orange
and San Diego counties, where large numbers
of illegal Mexicans reside, are conservative
with a strong Republican constituency.
New Mexico is a mixed state, electing
Democrats statewide but with Republicans in
Federal offices.

The election map shows that most of the
illegal immigrants are residing in Republican
dominated areas or areas which are mixed
with frequent Republic representation.

The 8 million people in the US illegally are
primarily Mexicans. Should they become citizens,
an extreme majority of them would register and
vote the Democratic Party. They are of great
interest to the Democratic party for that one
reason.

The insertion of several million new Democrats
in their regions of residency would alter the
constituency base dramatically and would change
the entire balance of power in the country.

Thus, the push to find a way for these Mexican
illegal immigrants to become citizens has been
on the top of the agenda for the Democratic
Party.

Should 8 million people become citizens in a
short time, they would not only be entitled to
vote, they would be entitled to all government
benefits. This one of the major consequences
that the American people would bear.

Since the issue of illegal immigrants status
has now been placed on the table at this
time....prior to the 2008 elections.....let's
look at the options that make more sense.

In addressing the issue of illegal immigrants
residing in the US, which has to be addressed
in some manner, the US should consider a path
to permanent residency, not US citizenship.

Permanent resident status would provide a
solution to their primary complaints and give
them the legal right to work. They could buy
or rent property and engage in the business of
daily life without fear of deportation.

However, this option would remove the issues
of voting rights and entitlement to government
benefits. This option would be best for the
United States.

The issue needs to be addressed in terms of
what is best for America. What is best for
America is for the borders to be tightly
regulated and those currently illegally
in the country to be screened for criminal
background. Those with a clean background
check could potentially qualify for permanent
residency. Those with a criminal history
need to be returned to their country of
origin.

If you recall years back, the North
American Free Trade Agreement was enacted
partially to enable Mexico and other countries
to have more employment and business
opportunities in their own countries. They
did get that benefit and many US firms
relocated and many US jobs were lost as
the result. The US citizen has already
sacrificed for the financial-humanitarian
interest of those less fortunate than us...
in hopes of stopping the hemorrhage of
illegal immigration.

The social resentment that exists in the US
will worsen if these illegal aliens are
afforded the opportunity for citizenship.
This will compound other problems. This
will become a highly detrimental political
action should the Democratic design prevail.

The issues behind the rhetoric need to be
seen clearly and the underlying strategy
exposed. We need to do only what is best
for America.

That answer is clear to the intelligent
civilian.