Let's get to task on determining what to do about these wars we've gotten into. We know what should be done with the prisoners according to our national documents.

Regarding Afghanistan, we must examine the primary apparatus to the operation. We went there against terrorism, to capture one man, Osama bin Laden. If Osama is not in Afghanistan, we should turn authority of Afghanistan over to the United Nations or the civil authority of the state, legally, and leave for home. But before going on a warranted search and invade mission to Afghanistan we must examine the evidence and warrant we used to go to war.

The video of the confession of Osama bin Laden to 9/11 is phony. Examine it in the Loose Change video or linked on this page. I will also place it on What Every American Should Know. This confession is weighted by the events of 9/11, which can be deconstructed adequately in statements on this page. It is extremely likely that Osama bin Laden did not cause 9/11 to occur outside of American control. If he did cause it to occur by American invitation or organization or trickery, he and the organizers both are guilty, and the people and government of Afghanistan, and Iraq are the sufferers.

To plot a deceptive disaster, and have the fall guy run away to the country the organizers want to be in is a foot in the door. How do we get that foot out of the door, fix the problems that the foot has caused, and additionally properly fix the problems that they plotted deception and invasion for in the first place [likely to be peak oil, among other issues]?

It would be unconscionable to send additional troops to Afghanistan, or to Iraq, to accomplish operations. If additional forces were to be sent to these warzones, their origin would need to be international.

Should the topic be brought into the open while soldiers are on the ground in foreign lands? Maybe. What if it became known that 9/11 was phony while we had soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq still? It could happen tomorrow under the right circumstances. If it was discovered or publicized or legally acknowledged or found that the 9/11 confession tape is bogus, the entire Afghanistan war would be dissolved, and the Iraq war would become similarly dissolved by the pretext of 'WMD', they would merge and unite in cause. Soldiers might refuse to be deployed en masse, they might clamor to be called home or desert. The American public would demand a resolution to the events both in a 3-month window or structural elements would be at risk. The international community would demand American response and change in tactic, and we'd be basically finding our bags to leave and going. Beyond this, the resistance movements in Iraq and Afghanistan would intensify considerably and on a slope.

I would prefer to see those movements be towards the government in organizational and diplomatic and legislative manners rather than rage expressed in a military manner. I'd rather remove our soldiers from Afghanistan and Iraq on an occupation level voluntarily and now and leave ideally stable governments or UN handlers in place than be politically forced to do so by outrage. That way facing facts about 9/11 and the wars will be easier, as they would not be currently in our American hands.

American citizens have the right to face charges if they are detained. This is the habeas corpus and is old like 1215. They also have the right to not be tortured, which is cruel and unusual punishment. Capital punishment is also cruel and unusual, and is contrary to the inalienable right to life. All men are created equal, so the death penalty is inexcusable in any trial proctored by the US around the world All men created equal also receive all Constitutional and Bill of Rights documents afforded to every American.

Detaining POWs without charges is in violation of these principles. They have the right to habeas corpus, even if it is being on a battlefield and firing weapons against enemy forces. That is charge enough for detainment until charges can be realistically filed. If charges cannot be filed the person must be freed. If charges are pending they can be held until those charges are brought, only to be restricted by a fact finding period [say, of 90 days, so they can search the battlefield] or by the waiting cases of other defendants. Or by special delay by notified reasons from a grand jury or other high court. [In the interest of fairness and civility.]

Torturing POWs is against the law of America by means of the 8th amendment, is war crime, is against the Geneva Convention and other international treaties to which the United States is signatory. Torturing civilians or any other prisoner is against the same law.

Every morning in Africa, a gazelle wakes up.
It knows it must run faster than the fastest lion or it will be killed.
Every morning a lion wakes up.
It knows it must outrun the slowest gazelle or it will starve to death.
It doesn’t matter whether you are a lion or a gazelle.
When the sun comes up, you better start running.
-African proverb

"By September 1900 the British were in control of both Republics, except for the northern part of Transvaal. They however found that they only controlled the ground their columns physically occupied. As soon as the columns left a town or district, British control of that area faded away. The huge territory of the Republics made it impossible for the 250,000 British troops to control it effectively. The vast distances between the columns allowed the Boer commandos considerable freedom to move about. The Boer commanders also decided to adopt a guerrilla style of warfare. The commandos were sent to their own districts with the order to act against the British there whenever possible. Their strategy was to do as much damage to the enemy as possible, and then to move off and vanish when enemy reinforcements arrived."

and this
"Main article: The Banana Wars

The early decades of the 20th century saw a great amount of intervention in Latin America by the U.S. government, often under the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, and most often openly in aid of U.S. corporate interests. President William Howard Taft viewed "Dollar Diplomacy" as a way for American corporations to benefit while assisting in the national security goal of preventing European powers, above all the United Kingdom and Germany, from filling any possible financial or power vacuum."

it's all wiki.
consider it.

Overlapping major powers do not need to battle. They compete only for economic goals and taxation principles. Wealth should shortly become secondary to innovation and technology, considering the massive human labor potential and industrial differential in China, and the massive industrial and human labor potential differential in America. Technology will become more valuable to both these empires, and peak oil and massive multipolar politics and economics will stimulate the transition reducing fixed currencies' value. This is on a 3-5 year curve, with 10-12 year minor elements, though.

America controls Palau. It cannot be considered a seperate nation in the Coalition in Iraq. Neither can any other country or territory America controls.

The repercussions of these charges should be the relief of American troops from Iraq and Afghanistan by the United Nations. Peak oil and assorted energy and economic difficulties [shortage, poverty, etc] should be remedied with the newly used technologies of water splitting, vaporizing carburaters, and social programs and education reform. The courts can deal with what the courts will. From there everything should all into the proper place.

Using available evidence collected around www.everyotheramerican.blogspot.com, charges are being assembled against the US Government [George Bush et al 2000/2004].

It is theorized sufficient for trial that the 9/11 events were conspired upon by members of the PNAC or members of the Executive Branch to collapse the World Trade Centers and produce meaningful threats to the American people sufficient to perform wide legislative and political changes, some of which may still be to occur.

Please examine the evidence. It is on the testimony of New York City firemen that after the planes struck the towers there were numerous secondary explosions in the buildings, as well as a series of demolition-style explosions as the towers collapsed. A professor from BYU found on 20 June 2006 thermite on steel from the WTC. Photos from the story as well as the professor's findings are evidence of detonative explosives being found in the WTC. [NYC police and firemen are under gag orders not to discuss booms and rumblings felt shortly before the collapse at the base of the towers. This information should be procured using the freedom of information act.]

WTC Building 7 also collapsed without being struck by planes and with only two small fires burning on upper floors. No other steel and concrete building has collapsed from fire in history. The building's collapse took only about 5 seconds.

a) There were previously planted bombs in the WTC, causing its collapse about one hour after the planes hit.

Sources will show that the building was under 24-hour guard due to previous warnings, including the presence of bomb sniffing dogs. These dogs were removed for one day. It is likely that the bombs were planted on this day, and likely by persons working in collusion with those who also ordered the dogs be removed. Either the explosives were planted while these dogs were missing, or they had been there in the building for weeks, since before the warnings, or the hundreds of bombs were snuck into the building around the dogs in some other way. The massive amount of thermite required to collapse the WTC 1, 2, and 7 towers would have required substantial manpower and resources to procure, rigging ~77 stories of two buildings and an entire 3rd 47-story building with explosives.

b) The evidence of secondary explosives in the WTC shows that the event was premeditated, and that the planes hitting the building was expected, for the buildings to be detonated in association with the planestrikes.

The WTC towers were scheduled to fall on 9/11/01 and the entity who scheduled that fall had prior knowledge of the planestrikes.

Section 2 The Pentagon

The Pentagon was not hit by a 757, as is shown by trigonometry, opticals, and video released by the US Government in sources linked at www.everyotheramerican.blogspot.com. Because of this, we know that Flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon, and something else must have hit it from the video. Evidence on the field and the damage profile on the building show that an A3 light jet hit the Pentagon. The smell of cordite was also reported by witnesses, indicating the use of detonating explosives to contribute to the damage and possibly destroy evidence. The whereabouts of Flight 77 and its passengers are unknown.

Section 3 Flight 93

According to the Mayor of Cleveland and Delta Airlines, Flight 93 landed in Cleveland's airport at 10:45am on 9/11/01. According to the coroner on site at the alleged crashsite in Shanksville, PA, the crash looked like 'a 10 foot wide hole someone dug and dumped trash into'. No bodies were recovered and no tailpiece nor nosecone were recovered from the field. From legal reports, Flight 93 did not crash in a field in Shanksville, and its passengers were detained at Cleveland's airport and ushered to an undisclosed location.

Section 3.1 CIA and Al-Qaeda

Because secondary explosives were prepared in the WTC and the planes struck, someone arranged them both to happen on the same morning. It is unlikely that the entity that arranged these two conditions would be able to convince American agents to be on the planes hitting the WTC. For this they needed outside sources.

It is likely that members arranging 9/11 acquired Al-Qaeda agents through double agents posing as Islamic militants, and convinced suicide bombers that they were acting in their own and their families' and states' interests as they flew into the WTC.

The suicide bombers then were arranged to be flight trained in America ad guided onto the planes to hijack.

The CIA also trained, funded and armed Osama bin Laden and his Al-Qaeda in the 1980's and 1990's. President Clinton refused to accept him for rendition when he was arrested in Ethiopia. In the weeks before 9/11/01 bin Laden received specialized medical treatment as a guest at an American medical facility in the Middle East.

Section 4 Executive Order w-199i

In the months before 9/11, the FBI was attempting to investigate numerous arab suspects suspecting of being part of a terror plot and flight training under suspicious reasons. After requests were filed to formally investigate them by agents in Phoenix, AZ area, George W Bush issued EO w-199i, ordering the arrest of all agents who continue investigating 'Al-Qaeda and flight training arabs' for reasons of national security. The motives for this executive order may be an association between George W Bush and those who arranged 9/11. It is likely that George W Bush issued EO w-199i to protect suicide bombers arranged to be trained and fly into the WTC on 9/11. The secondary explosives would then be detonated and the entity arranging 9/11 would have succeeded in toppling the WTC and blaming it on Islamic terrorists, allowing the political conditions and events of the post-9/11 world.

Section 5 Peak Oil and the Invasion of Afghanistan

World oil reserves will peak around the year 2007/8. Because of infrastructure, this will have dramatic and negative market conditions on the world, especially the industrialized portions, and especially America. The White House was very concerned that the OPEC oil embargo of 1973 would cause another Great Depression according to an interview of John Perkins by Democracy Now!

The Bush family and members of the PNAC [Project for a New American Century] know that world oil will peak around this time, and are aware of the economic consequences associated with it. It is likely that the PNAC and George W Bush are preparing America for peak oil by political deals with the Saudi royal family and by invading oil rich Iraq and strateigic Afghanistan, and/or possibly Iran.

The invasion of Afghanistan started on the pretense of the confession video of Osama bin Laden. A different man appears in the video. Bin Laden is left handed, but the man in the video writes something with his right hand. He also wears a gold ring and watch, which the islamic bin Laden cannot do by his faith. The man in the video has a differently shaped face and nose than Osama bin Laden. Bin Laden also swore that he had nothing to do with 9/11. The tape was found by US forces in Afghanistan in November of 2001, shortly before the invasion.

The Iraq war was also handled in an irregular manner. Particularly the Iraqi constitution, unique in the world that 100% of its companies may be foreign owned, allowing all of its oil assets to be owned by American reconstruction companies, namely Halliburton, vice president Richard Cheney's company until 2000. And that unique to the occupation, companies are given reconstruction contracts, often without bids. Furthermore, no meters were placed on the Iraqi oil derricks until 2005, during which time no record of oil extraction was kept.

The force sent to Iraq was also characteristically understrength and under budget, and engaged in numerous time and efficiency wasting and foot dragging exercises, perhaps in an attempt to make a war with a 3rd world country last from 2003 until peak oil's onset in 2007/8, during which time American interests would be in control of a majority of the world's usable oil, with possible interests in Iran, Venezuela, and Nigeria.

This economic condition would be extremely beneficial to America and America would be in a position to economically crush both China and Russia and choose to supply its neighbors and friends with oil at politically bargaining prices.

Chapter 6 Alternative Energy

There is evidence that oil interests have engaged in technology quashing exercises against Stanley Meyer and other patent holders from WW2 to the present. Evidence linked to at www.thepowercompany.blogspot.com demonstrates patents of technologies able to provide abundant renewable energy from water, as well as to achieve exemplary oil efficiency using vaporizing carburaters. This technology was demonstrated by Shell Oil company between 1929 and 1973, and alluded to by Ford and GM. European vehicles and companies less affected by these principles but without access to the patents have demonstrated fuel refinement techniques and engine standards that soundly surpass American automotive achievements, yet these achievements have not been duplicated in America, despite holding better patents and capabilities.

Instead American interests have suppressed clean free energy and fuel, possibly by the demonstration of the effectiveness of the US-Japanese oil embargo and by the interests of Saudi Arabian oil royals and American oil barons, such as the Bush family. Stanley Meyer was reportedly offered $1,000,000,000 to sit on his patents, but refused. He was killed in 1998.

Had the Pogue carburater [US pat.# linked to at www.thepowercompany.blogspot.com] or other high efficiency oil technology been installed, oil proliferation would have become meaningless, and the WW2 military deterrant of controlling oil over the Far East would have been lost, and Saudi and American economic interests would have been dashed. The same could be said of US coal mining or nuclear technology.

Section 7 Conclusion

For these reasons, the perpetrators of 9/11 must be found, the market factors of peak oil exposed and those who suppressed advanced technology brought to justice, and the dangers of war over scarcity of oil or energy eradicated, and the threat of carbon pollution from industries and motors eliminated.

The likely suspects are the signatories of the PNAC, George W Bush et al and the Bush Family, the Saudi Royal Family, and the members of the Skull and Bones fraternity.

This case should be filed in Washington, DC, because of the capitol nature of the offenses alleged and the location of the seat of power of the defendants.

Internal and External Markets and Justice

Peak oil is a problem we can solve internally. So is terrorism. We could try to solve them externally, but the choices we are given in changing the outside world to match America's demands and needs are limited.

For peak oil, outside America we can try to find more oil reserves in the outside world to bring into America, or we can try to reduce non-American use of oil. The first choice is unrealistic based on economic and geological indicators. Expanding America into colonies such as Iraq or Saudi Arabia to get more oil inside America is unethical and would result in choice #2, which is also unethical. The second choice is unethical because it is sabotage, literally terrorism.

We can change the internal portions of America to be more human by reducing our oil consumption through efficiency, conservation, and alternative. This is a pro-market and pro-love choice that will have many side benefits in the environment, society, productivity

==

Accumulating wealth used to mean something like proof of service to others. Through proof of labor, a receipt for labor. This is honorable, and if it were the law of life then money would equal honor and righteousness that come with service. Today money is not only service. Because of the controlled economic and political global market system and the gaping disparities enforced in our culture and markets, money can also be the result of greed and unfairness, a reward for what is wrong. When wrong is rewarded, how long can we last? The Lord's justice is perfect.

A rich person who affords to and profits from engineering unfair environments is creating burden and woe, and spoiling the attitudes and experiences of millions of people, and preventing those people from serving one another and the world.

Wow. Whatever they do in Washington or Moscow or Fallujah, it is unimportant. The law was made for mankind, not mankind for the law. Behave in accordance with the Bible, with Paul's letter to the Romans, and a jury of angels and peers enacting your judgement from God should follow you.

If I drive through a red light having stopped and no one is there, I am innocent. The red light exists to keep the roads safe and organize traffic. But waiting for no one is a disservice to society because it uses your gas time and patience. Obey the spirit of the law, the holy Spirit.

Examine the fiscal report on beating swords into plowshares.

Please examine the latest page at What Every American Should Know regarding thermate discovered on WTC girders on 20 June 2006.






Bank Data Secretly Reviewed by U.S. to Fight Terror

This is crime. It's a violation of the 4th ammendment, and the people responsible for it should be investigated in relation to their oaths of office to protect the Constitution. This is warrantless, which is directly unconstitutional. Now is when to begin filing charges and placing subpoenas to appear in court. Supreme Court, move. I will email you shortly.

State workers denied access to political blogs

This too is a violations of the 1st ammendment.

I am also pleased to know that the Huffington Post has an AIM name. "Huffpost". More businesses, in fact, all businesses, should front the $0 it takes to maintain official aim and other IM names for ease of consumer and customer information.

Law is diplomacy.

Patriot Act.

Several Americans were arrested under portions of the Patriot Act for trying to send about $20,000 to relatives Kurdistan. They were not terrorists, they were not planning or associated with any crime. Just sending money to Kurdistan. Three have been convicted and face sentencing, a fourth man's trial is in July.

first, this is not the kind of thing the Patriot Act was for. Second, sending money home is not a crime. Third, the normal law enforcement procedures before the Patriot Act were sufficient. The president or one of his appointees in lieu of him is to coordinate macro level intelligence without the use of Patrioit Act laws.

This is not democracy:

"Tony Blair had already agreed to back military action to get rid of Saddam Hussein at a summit at the Texas ranch of President George W Bush three months earlier. "

The Downing Street Memos show how these wars are made. Responsibility should leave the hands of these people, and the likes who would have this happen.

Confessions of an Economic Hit Man


Consider what happened the last time South American leaders stood up to the US Economic Hit Men and Oil Companies. The charitable president of Panama and the president of Ecuador were assassinated not by accidents, by the CIA Jackals.

They refused to accept World Bank loans. The president of Panama said he didn't need the money, didn't want to get personally rich. That he wanted us to give him the loans not to build highways and constructions for the rich, but for the poor, and that if this hitman did this for him, he would ensure that their company got a lot more work, good work, that would help the poor people of his country.

South America is coming again.

Mao Zedong said that political power grows from the barrel of a gun.

It does not. It grows from the love of humanity and the collective goals we strive to achieve together. Fear grows from the barrel of a gun. If fear is your politic, you are no leader. You are a despot.

A situation of statelessness, state in absentia, and fluxuating national identity could easily be described or expressed by the situation in the post below. Right now, Iraqis hold Iraqiness in their hands. They can be anything they want, and are slowly, doggedly deciding under heavy fire and consideration. I applaud them and support their choice and choiceability, and would like to give them every example they need to decide upon and also give them every peace that they can receive to heal and feel upon.

They cannot be forced into a state, and they will not be. Not by their government, not by America or Iran, not by a religion. Their state should continue with less violence and pleoform into the righteousness of the people by righteousness.

This is every people.

Be direct inline with God's justice. Desire goodness and mercy for all and for the self.

The past two posts were inspired by the events surrounding Hugo Chaveza building a Klishnikov factory in Venezuela.

Clearly, peace is the answer, and described have been the ways to get it to happen wonderfully throughout the world.

But in the event of forced war, it may be an interesting tactic for a government or military to immediately surrender to an enemy and begin a guerilla 'second stage' war right away, or after short weeks of primary non-engagement or complication warfare.

Let me chart the possible advancement of a highly pitched war of a large force launched against a very small force in comparison, on a small interestingly terrained oil bearing nation. The goal in all situations is peace, and even a small defending nation must remember this. This is to outline the defense of a small and righteous nation against a large aggressor.

The first choice of the small nation would be to cease production and sabotage its own oil reserves. This would complicate world oil markets and if the giant nation relied heavily on oil for its civilian, economic, military, or diplomatic pursuits, this would weaken the enemy considerably before the first shot was fired, and provide them with international and intranational pressure on the war effort. If the war is truly necessary, it will likely continue and justice will be pursued, but if it is a sidetrack, its strength will be sapped and the war eventually retracted.

Primary fighting between the militaries of the large and small nation would be foolishness. The small nation has no hope of defeating the large nation directly. The better choice for the small military would intuitively be to engage the large military forces at prime opportunities, and to abandon all defensive targets. No ground can effectively be held by the small nation. This should be accounted for and the choicest defensive areas used most wisely.

After a short period of standing resistance, perhaps an incidence of using shoulder fired rockets against planes and enemy hardware and making the best possible use of existing military hardware, and then abandoning the battle and the war itself to presuppose disbanding the defensive government and military in favor of becoming militant NGO's by division, each with the common core of the previous establishment. The ex-government would not be fighters but instead become foreign diplomatic forces, and national/international communication nexus for the defensive population and for the support/cessation of the war. Upon disbanding, the ex-forces can call upon international diplomacy organizations to extert diplomatic pressure upon the aggressor and to bring international aid to help the people of the occupied defensive nation.

The desired goal of the defensive organizations would be to get the aggressor nation out of the area militarily and to someday resume the defending nation's free sovereign status. The previous leaders are unimportant, any previous defensive goals can be reachieved by the surviving people and the remaining landmasses and borders. L'eta^t? C'est personne.

This would not happen to a violent or wrongful dictatorship because of the profusion of media and the education of ethical righteousness from freedom of information and pursuit, and God's blessing. The people's natural desire to be free from the brutality of any dictatorship would arise in the freedom and basically force a revolution among the people during forced engagement wartime. The people would then have the difficulty of forming a new government and national ethic [or ethics] while effectively at war and occupied.

This would also not happen to a large nation fighting a despotic small nation, as was demonstrated in the first months of the war in Iraq. Indeed Saddam Hussein and his military forces were players of evil and destroying them came with righteousness, but shortly after that event, their power dispersed and we found ourselves fighting a GOOD FORCE of the Iraqi people and their love. We still fight that good, and the good American people will not fight the good Iraqi people. As the aggressors, we face the blame and our military efforts are misdirected, producing considerable internal friction, as is righteous when a good person is forced to do bad things to another good person. This will result in the good person rejecting the bad forces and defending the fellow good people, or in the good person surrendering goodness if they are not strong enough to recognize what is good or are tricked.

Repost : Edit

Today I heard a report from NPR about the Iraq war, particularly about an incident from a corps in the backwoods region of the Sunni Triangle. These soldiers get IEDs every day, sustain mortar fire 3 days running. They are common, and they say it amazes them that it only reaches the news when 'a roadside bomb goes off somewhere in Baghdad.' They apparently had 7 that week.

In this report they iced 6-8 "MAM"s, which stands for 'military aged men'. Not because they had weapons, not because they committed a crime, but because they showed up from a mosque after an AC-130 gunship began firing at a roadside bomb.

First, I'd hit it from the hum turret at 30 yards and rely on the twin metal shields. Second, I would NOT call in a ground strike to kill 6-8 men who showed up after a gunship started shooting. That is homicide and nothing less. I can imagine they were in the mosque praying, possibly with their women, and came out to see what the shooting was. Just being a military aged man is not a crime punishable by execution. How many of you listeners or readers are MAMs? Do you know any? Would they kill you? These people made no 'sudden moves', had no evidence of armament, nothing. Dead.

I realized while listening to this report that the insurgency in Iraq is a war of families against the US military. Extended families. This is a feud that we've started and are sticking around to fight. Call in the UN, they are a neutral party. We dumped weapons on the area, came in and searched through women's clothes in front of families, and turned our backs. This is shame, especially in that part of the world, and the only cure is more cowbell... I mean, kill them.

Or peace.

We've taken a freestyle war and pinned it down, yet again. We've already left the safety of our walls. Lessons of Cambodia are thus: don't fight in someone else's civil war. Don't fight dirty. Don't get involved in a land war in Asia. Only fight when you have to. The enemy we're fighting in Iraq is 'discontent'. Not Ho Chih Minh, not Kim Jung Il. There is no man we can kill to wipe this thing out. We're fighting ghosts.

If we want to get to the bottom of this war, as a people as well as a nation, we should examine the video that got it all started: The Osama bin Laden Confession video [link:9/11 Confession Video Faked]. 'Osama' is wearing a gold ring and watch in the video. Muslims cannot wear gold rings by their religion. He writes something with his right hand, but Osama is left handed. His face is also different than in other publications. This is not Osama. 12 jurors would agree this is not Osama.

From there we can examine both forwards and backwards in time. 70 million Americans and the vast majority of NYC residents want the 9/11 Commission reopened for a plethora of reasons. Nine of the nineteen alleged hijackers remain alive. The mayor of Cleveland and Delta both said that Flight 93 landed in Cleveland at 10:45am on the morning of 9/11/01. firefighters reached the 77^th/78^th floor of the WTC and were attempting to put out the flames from the crash, while secondary explosions rocked the building. WTC Building 7 collapsed without being struck by a plane. American medical staff gave Osama bin Laden medical treatment as an honored guest weeks before 9/11. It is very likely that Osama Bin Laden has nothing to do with the incident, and therefore invading Afghanistan was a farce.

But that is for another shovel load. Here we are anyway, working in Afghanistan and Iraq. From the outlook of a sane and informed American, what is the best way out of these fiasco/quagmires? If we’ve truly ignited a blood feud between the American military and Iraqi honor, the best solution is to get out and replace the nanny occupation with someone else who is not the worst enemy of millions of Iraqis, and whom has a longstanding reputation of nation building: the UN. George W Bush refused their offerings of assistance in Fall 2003, but this is and continues to be the perfect moment to reduce our force strength in the region and replace it with fresh rainbow forces who can hope to heal the wounds of the Iraqi nation without simultaneously being an incendiary force.

There is more we can do for the people of Iraq than free them from a brutal dictator…We can leave them in peace.

Today I heard a report from NPR about the Iraq war, particularly about an incident from a corps in the backwoods region of the Sunni Triangle. These soldiers get IEDs every day, sustain mortar fire 3 days running. They are common, and they say it amazes them that it only reaches the news when 'a roadside bomb goes off somewhere in Baghdad.' They apparently had 7 that week.

In this report they iced 6-8 "MAM"s, which stands for 'military aged men'. Not because they had weapons, not because they committed a crime, but because they showed up from a mosque after an AC-130 gunship began firing at a roadside bomb.

First, I'd hit it from the hum turret at 30 yards and rely on the twin metal shields. Second, I would NOT call in a ground strike to kill 6-8 men who showed up after a gunship started shooting. That is homicide and nothing less. I can imagine they were in the mosque praying, possibly with their women, and came out to see what the shooting was. Just being a military aged man is not a crime punishable by execution. How many of you listeners or readers are MAMs? Do you know any? Would they kill you? These people made no 'sudden moves', had no evidence of armament, nothing. Dead.

I realized while listening to this report that the insurgency in Iraq is a war of families against the US military. Extended families. This is a fued that we've started and are sticking around to fight. Call in the UN, they are a neutral party. We dumped weapons on the area, came in and searched through women's clothes in front of families, and turned our backs. This is shame, especially in that part of the world, and the only cure is more cowbell... I mean, kill them.

Or peace.

The enemy we're fighting in Iraq is 'discontent'. Not Ho Chih Minh, not Kim Jung Il. There is no man we can kill to wipe this thing out. We're fighting ghosts.

Restricting Technology

Certain individuals promote the concept of restricting technology and social or economic advancement and independence to prevent the potential for abuse by 'malign individuals'.

'Wacos' can be handled properly. The Amish pose no threat, but they are self sufficient. Working together with other individually reliant communities is a fabulous way to make a strong and vibrant economy and world. This can be done through free communication, regional reliance, ease of travel, and local business, and will produce a commonwealth of allied communities all benefitting from efficiency and service maximizing entrepreneurship. Free central communication and the inalienable right to it will integrate all cultures and people ad radical forms will have the ability to discss, others who will care and share and refine their desire to make a difference.

Unfortunately, this restrictionist economic and social worldview seems to be in effect, conscious or no. It would be wiser to practice economic and electrical decentralization, to produce well appoined fuel cells and solar paneling and cars that can run without relying on gasoline, lives that can run without relying on the state. This seems to be the ultimate in deregulation, yes? This kind of technological and social demystification, promoting self sufficiency, will make our system more resilient rather than brittle.

Hydrogen Economy > Nuclear Proliferation

<From http://thepowercompany.blogspot.com>

Hydrogen Economy > Nuclear Proliferation

We can cleanse the world of nuclear reactors by making cheaper more plentiful hydrogen reactors. If fuel cell technology is less expensive and cleaner than nuclear power it will be unthinkable to approach nuclear's risks. Fuel cells are massively simpler than controlling nuclear fission. Building these plants will effectively market-force the Nuclear Non Proliferation treaty, because nuclear plants' premium and risk would be for only one purpose at that point. Weapons. Energy is energy and hydrogen is plentiful.

To get nuclear reactors out of Iraq, Russia, China, India, Pakistan, and any other nation with suspect nuclear intentions, introduce cheap fuel cells to their markets. The United Nations should be contacted with relevant information about this blockbuster solution.

House of Representatives
US Senate
White House

This is a critical method to ending nuclear proliferation. Here is the article. We can make nuclear proliferation unprofitable and therefore blatant and save the environment at the same time.

It was said the last time we were on the brink of war with Iran that if we invaded, peak oil would approach markets *immediately* instead of in 2007, because Iran would stop selling us oil. The day or two after that news circulated, American attitudes towards war and Iran changed much to the concillatory. It seems that attitudes have crept back.

If we invade Iran, the world will reduce its oil production to a estimated 2-3mbd below demand levels, putting us into oil shock. This will drive oil prices up to numerous times their current price and likely cause worldwide runaway inflation due to shortage and prices.


This may look like being caught between nuclear proliferation and peak oil. But there are other ways out of the mess. The United Nations is an organizing force and Iran can be brought into the peaceful and holy brotherhood of mankind. America should stop the wrongful Middle Eastern and world economic endeavors and seek their solutions before seeking their domination. Two Million Wells can do much more than any war, and thinking around oil will help the economy, society, health, and the environment. It is not yet too late.

I am disappointed to hear that two companies are competing to design new nuclear weapons. Slashdot.

The Nuclear Issue

Nuclear weapons are terror weapons by definition. There is no nuclear explosion that could go off in an effective area that will not kill thousands or hundreds of thousands of civilians in the process of its use. Nuclear weapons aimed at urban centers are murderbombs. AKA terror. A nuclear weapon is too large on a modern battlefield to be truly effective. Smart bombs and prayer are much more effective.

We have conventional weapons that are as effective as small nuclear weapons. The Vietnam era daisycutter has an effective diameter of over one kilometer. What target will not be destroyed by a one kilometer explosion? Or any series of them? Bunkers deeper than 1000 meters. I'm just going to have to ask you to build a better burrowing missile for that instead of a better bomb. What good is anything buried under 1000 destroyed meters of earth during war? I can think of nothing. The only difference between a nuclear bomb and two daisycutters is radiation liability.

Nuclear weapon research is expensive, exotic, toxic, and is socially unusable. Will it upgrade our existing nuclear deterrent, which we have pledged to eliminate? No. Conventional nuclear weapons are as deadly as ever, and we still have the power to wipe out life on earth. That power does not belong in the hands of mankind. It belongs in God's hands and no one else's. Reduce our military spending, reducing our nuclear payload. Reduce our military inefficiency and reduce our need for a military by increasing other forms of insurance of goodness.

Proposals by Hans Blix and other NNP proponents correctly identify nuclear weapons for their high terror potential and military uselessness, except in armageddon. In no reasonable scenario are defensive nuclear capabilities indispensible.

In the Gospels Jesus says to love your enemies and pray for them. To love your neighbor as yourself, to turn the other cheek. That he who raises the attack will be destroyed by the attack.

This leaves very little room for killing. The only way is in self defense when there is no other alternative. This can be etended to a national level, but I would say that prayer is much more effective than bullets, and that God's justice is perfect. God does not need our help exacting justice, merely our faith.

Freedom isn't free. It requires charity. Everything we got here came from God. Normal national defense and all that shouldn't be anything more than a blip on the radar. I am more concerned about international treaties, corporate action, political misrepresentation, and other factors than a the actions of a standing military. What is right is more important than 'winning' or eliminating all potential threats. What is right is unthreatened.

Do you know about the IMF and World Bank? About John Perkins, Economic Hit Man for the CIA? The farm subsudy? We have numerous trade agreements that are sapping and impoverishing. They create strife elsewhere in the world that we later attempt to use our military to deal with. This is not an effective method in business, and not an effective method in politics.

There is a certain honor to bushido and skill in physical prowess, but it is dependent on using it for good for all. We're on the verge of failing, not in strength, but in moral character, which leads to all failings. This is why I am concerned. -Edited 2006 06 12

The New[est] Insurgency

My personal reaction to the news report that al-Zarqawi is dead was 'oh, that guy.' I am little concerned with individuals in the Iraqi theater. We have made numerous environmental problems in Iraq, and their results, such as resistance, poverty, disruption, are bound to be environmental and not truly focused on any one man.

Plainly, what are they trying to do? Kill all the terrorists before more people get wind of American and western atrocities and rally against them? That is a two way race to the edge of a blade, and that cannot be won. Granted only about 5% of the world's muslim population are violent fundamentalists, but that is still millions of people. By engaging them in this nondescript manner we are hedging them power and by behaving badly during the battle we are championing them, even if two wrongs do not make a right. Republicans performing atrocities make democrats look like a good choice. And since we're offering no alternative in Iraq, it is either us or them.

We've taken a freestyle war and pinned it down, yet again. We've already left the safety of our walls. Lessons of Cambodia are thus: don't fight in someone else's civil war. Don't fight dirty. Don't get involved in a land war in Asia. Only fight when you have to.

If we want to get to the bottom of this war, as a people as well as a nation, we should examine the video that got it all started: The Osama bin Laden Confession video 9/11 Confession Video Faked. 'Osama' is wearing a gold ring and watch in the video. Muslims cannot wear gold rings by their religion. He writes something with his right hand, but Osama is left handed. His face is also different than in other publications. This is not Osama. 12 jurors would agree this is not Osama.

I don't even think he's the Al-Qaeda leader. I have no real evidence of that. Furthermore, Saddam Hussein's wife said that the man we captured is not Saddam. We probably have one of his doubles on trial. The question is whether *we* know.

Numerous questions have come up against all major terrorism events since 9/11. I believe that American law and forces pre-9.11 were able to handle and stop all significant terrorism activities, but that inside work created openings for either outside forces or an inside job to be performed on 9/11. This is a widely held belief. 70 million Americans want the 9/11 commission reopened.

Is terrorism truly a threat? Well, if you are talking about buildings and bombs blowing up, then yes, it is. If you are talking about foreigners and mercenaries doing this, I'd say they are a minimal threat or primarily rendition attacks.

The resistance in Iraq may be *faked*. Not everyday bombings and shootings in the streets, but we may be playing both sides of the coin if certain pieces of evidence and speculation assemble. We could have gone to Iraq full strength, with the recommended 300,000 soldiers fully prepared, and knocked down every province and suspect with strong force. Then held meaningful elections that summer [2003] after the meaningful opposition was destroyed. That would have been good continuation.

Instead we went in understrength and underfunded, and are wallowing around. Why did we do this? To waste time? To stand on top of oil? Peak oil is scheduled for 2007. We've installed clauses saying Iraqi comapnies do not need to be Iraqi and installed all of our own and Britain's major oil companies in Iraq. We own a lot of their oil by corporate rights. We do not truly need to control their country militarily. Our companies can control it and make all the profits for us. Is this our intention?

So what does this mean for the future? What is the best plan for right now? We should send the United Nations peacekeeping forces to Iraq, and to Afghanistan, and Iran for that matter, and primarily disengage ourselves from the region. The United Nations can handle fighting an 'insurgency' better than we can, since the insurgency is fuelled by reciprocation from atrocities , bad behavior, and aggression. The UN is almost entirely innocent of these things, and is a rainbow coalition whose goals are clearly for peace and in the interest of no individual nation. America is a hound dog barking over Iraq to lay down and stay down. The UN would be a gardener.

Why do we resist UN peacekeeping forces in Iraq? What are the reasons we gave?

Two Million Wells

One of the greatest tactical advantages we could accomplish in the world is to provide solar cookers to people living in Africa, South America, and parts of Southern Asia and the Middle East.

A solar cooker costs about $3 and can help impoverished people cook food and sterilize water without using a cooking fire. They can reflect the sun's rays from their position near the equator to cook instead of spending hours gathering wood, stripping land, and releasing carbon into the atmosphere.

In the Darfur region, women who must go out to forage for fuelwood are at sharply increased risk of assault. Giving them solar cookers would allow them to remain with their family and make different use of their time.

3 billion people live on less than $3 a day. 1 billion live on less than $1 a day. Solar cookers will reduce the level of subsistance living and make subsistance foraging and poverty take less time so they can focus more on family, education, advancing society and economic activity.

Giving out1 billion solar cookers to 4 billion people would cost perhaps 2 billion dollars. By replacing current foreign aid programs or taking ~1/2% of our military budget we can improve the lives and security of billions of people. That is more effective than *any* military operation conceivable.

The next best thing we can do is to contract in the 3rd world to dig wells within 7.5km [~5 miles] of every community. Africa is just under 30 million km2, and much of it is uninhabited desert or areas already having fresh water. If we put wells every 15km on 30 mkm2 of earth's populated regions, we could provide fresh water to billions of people who currently go without, or rely on unstable or dirty water sources, spreading disease and requiring medical attention.

An area of this size would be supplied by 2 million wells, and could cover all of Africa's populated areas, along with every needful place in South America and South Asia. We could send teams to work and to contract with local laborers, aiding local economies and reducing the price of the projects. If digging each well cost $1000 dollars, this program would also cost $2 billion. The real price of digging a 20-30 meter deep well likely falls in the $350-700 range when using local labor, tripod or Kelly-bar drilling methods, and reinforced aluminum piping.

With $4 billion dollars we could provide clean drinking water to the world and give them the means to cook food and sanitize water without foraging for or burning wood.

Call or email your senator and representative and ask them to do this project.