May Day and the Illuminati

Here is some conspiracy theory for the few myspace people that visit the NeoConservative Christian Right.
Have you heard of the Illuminati? I doubt it my history deprived young readers. Allegedly Adam Weishaupt created and organized the Illuminati on May 1, 1776.
The Illuminati were (or are) reputed to have an agenda for world domination via the placement of secret elites in leadership and rulership situations.
Conspiracy Theorists believe to this day the Illuminati operate in some compacity in collusion with other Secret Societies today.
There is a website dedicated to all subjects Illuminati and it is called, Illuminati Conspiracy Archive. At the ICA is a rather large monograph as to why May Day is the favorite of the Illuminati, Socialists, Communists, Anarchists and even New Agers.
So pop on over to May Day and the ‘Posthumous Influence of the Illuminati. Here you will find all kinds of reasons that May Day is the favorite of Conspiracy Theorists. A big clue: The Celtic Religion is highly involved. 

Plamegate is a Democratic Party Conspiracy

Joe Wilson and his form CIA wife Plame are a couple of pawns of the Liberal Left within the Democratic Party to slow down or derail the Conservative within the Bush Administration. It is so blantly obvious that credulity is beyond comprehension.
Look at a Wilson timeline of his version of facts. It is so contradictory that he is a Liberal liar or a self-deluded Liberal. That would make his wife in collusion to the lies. Check out The

(Update) Joe Wilson’s Forgetfulness

(A reader emails on my April 9 "Joe Wilson’s Forgetfulness" post:

This is largely forgotten now but Joe Wilson initially misled the public on a key question when the story first broke in the summer 2003:

Did the former Niger prime minister, Ibrahim Assane Mayaki, meet with any Iraqi officials in June 1999?

By not mentioning or even denying this meeting’s existence Wilson can conflate his conclusion that it was “highly doubtful that any such transaction had ever taken place” with the weaker British allegation that Iraq attempted to buy uranium from Africa.

Timeline [of Wilson’s answer to that question] in brief:

1. Wilson says “yes” during his private CIA debrief in March, 2002.

2a. Wilson fails to mention the meeting in his NYT op/ed July 6, 2003.

2b. Wilson fails to mention the meeting during his first “Meet the Press” interview, July 6, 2003.

2c. DCI Tenet says “yes” in a July 11, 2003 CIA statement which brings the meetings existence to the public for the first time.

3. Wilson says “no” during a “Frontline” PBS Interview in August, 2003.

4. Wilson says “no” twice during his second “Meet the Press” interview in October, 2003.

5. Wilson says “yes” in his book “The Politics of Truth” January, 2004.

6. Wilson says “yes” during his third “Meet the Press” interview in May, 2004.

7. Wilson says “yes” to SSCI committee staff –report released in July, 2004.

Detailed timeline/sources follow:

1. March 5, 2002 Wilson debriefed by CIA just after returning from Niger (SSCI report, p.43-44): "Mayaki said, however, that in June 1999, XXXX businessman, approached him and insisted that Mayaki meet with an Iraqi delegation to discuss “expanding commercial relations” between Niger and Iraq. The intelligence report said that Mayaki interpreted “expanding commercial relations” to mean that the delegation wanted to discuss uranium yellowcake sales. The intelligence report also said that “although the meeting took place, Mayaki let the matter drop due to the UN sanctions on Iraq.”

2a-b. July 6, 2003: “What I Didn’t Find In Africa” Wilson’s NY Times Op/ed: Wilson fails to mention the Iraqi/Niger meeting, in the NYT op/ed or in his first “Meet the Press” interview that same day.

2c. July 11, 2003: DCI Tenet Statement: "He [Wilson] reported back to us that one of the former Nigerian officials he met stated that he was unaware of any contract being signed between Niger and rogue states for the sale of uranium during his tenure in office. The same former official also said that in June 1999 a businessman approached him and insisted that the former official meet with an Iraqi delegation to discuss "expanding commercial relations" between Iraq and Niger. The former official interpreted the overture as an attempt to discuss uranium sales."

3. August 23, 2003: Frontline Interview:

Frontline: Did you see any evidence that they, the Iraqis, had sought to purchase uranium from Niger?

Wilson: No. The only thing that was explained to me in one conversation was of course there was this Nigerian delegation who came through in 1999 that had preliminary discussions related to the resumption of diplomatic relations between the two countries. Uranium was not discussed. There was another request for a meeting on the margins of an Islamic conference meeting that was turned down. …

4. October 5, 2003 Wilson appears again on “Meet the Press” (MSNBC, transcript):

Russert: "…the White House will say Ambassador, … that your meeting with officials in Niger, including the suggestion that in June ’99 Iraqi officials met with officials from Niger, confirmed exactly that point: that by expanding commercial relations, they could have been talking about uranium, which would confirm the president’s suggestion that they were seeking uranium from Niger.”

Wilson: “Well, there’s a couple of problems with that. First of all, the meeting never took place. An intermediary came to this official, and said, “I want you to meet with these guys. They’re interested in talking about expanding commercial relations.” The person who talked to me said, “Red flags went up immediately, I thought of U.N. Security Council sanctions, I thought of all sorts of other reasons why we didn’t want to have any meeting. I declined the meeting,” and this was out of the country, on the margins of an OIC meeting. So it was a meeting that did not take place."

5. January, 2004 Wilson Speaks Again to His Source [Mayaki] (“The Politics of Truth” p.28) and for the first time changes his public story: Source [Mayaki] tells Wilson that “Baghdad Bob” was probably the Iraqi he [Mayaki] met at the OAU meeting in 1999,.

6. May 2, 2004 Wilson Appears on “Meet the Press”(MSNBC transcript) and contradicts his previous MTP statement:

"MR. RUSSERT: George Tenet in a statement said that a Niger official did say to you there may have been discussions about a potential business dealings and maybe that could have been a suggestion of uranium.

AMB. WILSON: That’s right. And, of course, as I put in the book, there was a meeting on the margins of an OAU summit between a senior Niger official and an Iraqi official who turns out to be the former minister of information, Baghdad Bob."

7. July 7, 2004 Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Report released: “In an interview with Committee staff, the former ambassador [Wilson] was able to provide more information about the meeting between former Prime Minister Mayaki and the Iraqi delegation. The former ambassador said that Mayaki did meet with the Iraqi delegation but never discussed what was meant by “expanding commercial relations.” The former ambassador said that because Mayaki was wary of discussing any trade issues with a country under United Nations (UN) sanctions, he made a successful effort to steer the conversation away from a discussion of trade with the Iraqi delegation.." (SSCI report, page 44.)

Interesting, if the quotes and context stand up.

Professorial Anti-Semitic Conspiracy

Professors Meirsheimer of the University of Chicago and Walt of Harvard Uninversity have made their academic mission to discredit Israel and Israel’s friends in America. Their claim: Israel’s National Interest are different than America’s National Interst; ergo all that claim friendship or lobby for Israel are anti-American and enemies of the United States of America.
Of course it is all a bunch of Liberal Leftist anti-Semitism. Biblically those that are friends of Israel are friends with God. America’s National Interest (whether relativists or atheists like or not) are hooked to the nation and Land of Israel. As long as America blesses Israel, America will be blessed. If America ever goes down the path of anti-Semitism, the curses of godlessness will overtake America.
That is my take, here is Josef Joffe’s take:
Common Denominator
by Josef Joffe
Only at TNR Online
Post date: 04.06.06
Two political scientists, John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago and Stephen Walt of Harvard, have recently sallied forth with a paper that puts The Protocols of the Elders of Zion to shame. The gist is that the "Israel Lobby," the core of which "is comprised of American Jews," keeps "bending U.S. foreign policy so that it advances Israel’s interests." As a result, the Jews have jeopardized not only U.S. security, but that of much of the rest of the world.  

Do these two have it out for the Jews? I have known and worked with them for ages, and I don’t think so. Is their paper (excerpts of which have appeared in the London Review of Books) anti-Semitic? It certainly trundles out many classics of this darkest of creeds: omnipotence, conspiracy, double-loyalty, and even treason, given that the "Lobby" works for another country, and against the American interest.

But let’s leave the Jew-baiting aside. The gravest indictment is that the screed is anti-American. For campaigning on behalf of this or that U.S. foreign policy is as American as apple pie. It started during the Revolution when pro-British "Tories" fought their colonial brethren over independence. A few decades later, sectional interests slugged it out over the War of 1812. During the Civil War, both sides sought help from various European powers. Thirty years later, another "lobby," the Hearst press, whipped the country into war against Spain, which left the United States with a tidy little empire in Cuba and in the Philippines.

When it came to trade, "Main Street" did not like what "Wall Street" wanted, and the agrarian West proclaimed a pox on both their houses. Remember the fierce domestic opposition to entry into World Wars I and II? Irish-Americans were "pro-German," so to speak, because they were anti-British. Greek-Americans have always tried to sever the strategic tie that binds the United States to Turkey. Cuban-Americans still keep the rest from (legally) smoking Monte Cristos; African-Americans have lobbied hard against South Africa and for intervention in Haiti. Throw in big labor, big business, and the farm lobby, which have made mince-meat out of America’s commitment to free trade.

So foreign policy has never "stopped at the water’s edge." And no wonder, for Americans said goodbye in 1620 to those princes and potentates of Europe who proclaimed that they, and they alone, embodied the national interest. Ever since, everybody has claimed a legitimate voice in the definition of the national interest. Why, then, single out the "Israel Lobby?"

Because of Iraq? Well, the American Jewish community was not exactly gung-ho over the 2003 war. Because officials by the name of Wolfowitz and Perle were in the forefront of the regime-changers? That makes you wonder about those folks called Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Rice. Is the American president a dupe of the Zionists? Are all of them latter-day marranos, descendants of those Spanish Jews who practiced their faith in secret in order to escape from the clutches of the Inquisition?

But let’s not reduce this to names and labels. The central issue raised by "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy" is: Who is in, and who is out? Whose voice is legitimate, and who speaks with treasonous intent? In the end, this 83-page pamphlet reads almost everybody out of the American congregation of 298 million. Once you subtract the Daughters of the American Revolution and the descendants of the signers of the Declaration of Independence, the rest of America is hyphenated in one way or another, divided by regional, ethnic, and religious identities.

Would they all have to apply to the self-appointed guardians of the national interest for certification as true Americans? Do they have to be a Hancock or Huntington if they want to speak up? Let’s say I am a Ukrainian-American. Am I automatically suspect because I plead for an American policy that would resist Russian pressure against Kiev? I certainly would want to be opposed on the basis of my analysis, and not of my presumed ethnic loyalties.

Come to think of it, "Mearsheimer" has a suspicious German ring. So let this foreign policy maven (if you pardon the expression) prove that he is a real American before he makes, say, a pitch for German-American friendship. He would rightly resent such a demand as a slur against his professional and, indeed, moral integrity. But in the process, he and his co-author would be forced to own up to the absurdity of their footnote-studded pamphlet. And worse: to its anti-democratic essence.

Democracy is about "We the People." In the American case, "We" are no longer white Anglo-Saxon Protestants. The secret of this oldest democracy, give or take a Civil War, is the universalism that has preempted European-style religious and ideological bloodshed. In America, everybody has a share, and it’s all voting stock.


Josef Joffe , publisher-editor of the German weekly Die Zeit, teaches U.S. foreign policy at Stanford. His book Überpower: America’s Imperial Temptation will be published by W.W. Norton in June.


Copyright 2006, The New Republic

American Banks Funding Islamofascist

The Bank of America has been caught laundering drug money and diverting to Islamofascist terrorists. This is the kind of greed that makes a good Neoconservative Capitalist as myself look bad. Indeed, as soon as I read this the scarlet flush of shame crimsoned my face. How can such greed from an American institution go unnoticed by the MSM and someone not be indicted for treason?
April 4, 2006
Money doesn’t talk
Money doesn’t talk, it swears – Bob Dylan

You want some 9/11 truth? You won’t find it in the accretions of increasingly absurd conjecture and the tail-chasing diversions of no evidentiary value. The hard-ass, 9/11 truth has the colour of money and the sweet stink of opium, and plenty of both.

How’s this for a headline, and from Institutional Investor, even:

Mystery N.Y. Bank Allegedly Funnels $3B In Funds To Terrorists

A bank identified only as being one of the largest and most prominent in New York has been caught allegedly funneling an estimated $3 billion in profits from drug deals and other illegal activities to Mideast terrorists, The New York Post reports. Manhattan District Attorney Robert Morgenthau, the paper says, plugged the profits pipeline as part of an ongoing investigation of suspected funds flowing through local banks.

In the most recent scheme, according to The Post, the money originating from the so-called "tri-border region" of Argentina, Brazil and Paraguay, was transferred to an account at the New York bank through a money-transfer company in Uruguay and then on to accounts in the Mideast, where they were distributed over the past two years to the likes of Al-Qaeda, Hamas and Hezbollah. "I can’t go out and arrest Osama bin Laden," the 84-year-old Morgenthau told The Post. "But I can try to cut off his money."

"Tri-border region" sound familiar? "Chiggerbit" notes on the RI board that it’s a territory in which Sun Myung Moon has recently planted his Unification flag, acquiring the land atop the Guarani aquafer. Moon’s 600,000 hectares also happens to be "an enormously strategic point in both the narcotics and arms trades," according to Paraguay’s former drug czar, who adds that "the available intelligence clearly shows that the Moon sect is involved in both these enterprises." And "Starroute" adds that Khalil bin Laden, Osama’s brother, has business connections in the nearby Brazilian province of Minas Gerais, "an alleged center for training terrorists."

The Post today discloses the identity of the "mystery bank." And guess who:

The Manhattan DA is pursuing a settlement with the Bank of America in a major money-laundering probe of more than $3 billion that flowed from Latin America through one of the bank’s accounts to Mideast fanatics, sources said yesterday.

Sources familiar with the case – reported in yesterday’s Post – revealed that DA Robert Morgenthau is close to reaching a settlement with the nation’s second largest bank. The bank is not being accused of complicity with money-launderers or terrorists, but is facing possible penalties for dealing with an unlicensed money transmitter from Uruguay, sources said.

The bank will be permitted to settle, like Jonathan Bush’s Riggs Bank, because to find such institutions complicit would mean the Apocalypse of All Safe Assumptions. It’s why September 11th’s insider trading scandal, once reported by Bloomberg as "the worst case ever," was made to dry up and blow away, and the data recovery project of "dirty doomsday dealings" made on World Trade Center computers disappeared into the belly of the beast it was intended to investigate.

The money’s swearing, and it’s swearing at us. Over the fractious din of arguments for missile strikes, demolition and holograms, can you hear it?

OK City Bombing Conspiracy Theory Congressional Investigation

I really have not paid to much attention to the alternate conspiracy theories pertaining to the OKC bombing involving McVeigh and Nichols. However the involvement of a United States Congressman piqued my attention. If Representative Rohrabacher indeed carries out an investigation, it will be fascinating what the resulting report gives us.


Congressman demands new OKC bomb probe: Rohrabacher sees foreign connection, conspiracy beyond McVeigh, Nichols WorldNetDaily



WASHINGTON – Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., is calling for a congressional investigation of the Oklahoma City bombing because of evidence of a foreign connection and a conspiracy broader than Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols.

In a memo written to Rep. Henry Hyde, chairman of the House International Relations Committee, Rohrabacher said he has spent 12 months personally investigating the April 19, 1995 bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building that killed 168 and concluded "there is ample evidence to justify an investigative hearing into this historic crime."

The focus of the probe, he suggests, should be "Was there a foreign connection to the Oklahoma City bombing?"

"The official position today, defended by the FBI and Justice Department, is that the OKC bombing, which left 168 persons dead, was planned and executed solely by two disgruntled veterans, Timothy McVeigh, Terry Nichols, with the limited involvement of Michael Fortier," writes Rohrabacher. "After my inquiry I have concluded that others were involved and that information about the bombing is being kept from the public and from the Congress. The jurisdiction of my Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations extends only to the possible international and foreign involvement in the crime. Even within that framework there is ample evidence to justify an investigative hearing."

Rohrabacher worked closely in his personal investigation with Jayna Davis, author of the WND Book, "The Third Terrorist: The Middle East Connection to the Oklahoma City Bombing." The congressman said there are two major targets of inquiry which indicate a foreign connection to the OKC bombing:

"First, Terry Nichols and, to some degree, Timothy McVeigh appear to have had contact with Arab, Muslim, or Middle Eastern terrorist elements prior to and during the implementation of the bomb plot," he wrote. "Second, just as significant, there is evidence of a personal relationship between Timothy McVeigh and Andreas Carl Strassmeier, a German national who was promoting violent insurrection to white supremacists at their nearby stronghold called Elohim City."

 Rohrabacher concludes in his memo to Hyde: "(I)t is highly likely that the Arab connection and or the Strassmeier connection played a significant role in the planning and execution of the murderous bombing of the OKC federal building. In both possible scenarios, the official investigation fell short and further investigation has been discouraged ever since."

He suggested a one-day or two-day hearing and suggested subpoenas be issued to former FBI Director Louis Freeh and former Attorney General Janet Reno.

"The bombing of the OKC federal building was the greatest slaughter of innocent Americans until 9/11," Rohrabacher writes. "It is possible there was an al-Qaida connection. It is possible there was a Strassmeier connection. There is ample reason to disbelieve the official version of this horrific crime. It is up to us to begin setting the record straight."


Copyright 1997-2006 All Rights Reserved. Inc.

The Milosevic Conspiracy

There is quite the conspiracy theory developing surrounding the death Slobodan Milosevic. Here is a short history of the claims of Milosevic’s death. All the claims were in less than a week incidently:

First we were told Milosevic died of natural causes.

Then we were told Milosevic committed suicide.

Then we were told Milosevic’s body contained drugs that counteracted the effect of his regular heart drugs.

Then we were told, under 24 hour armed guard and camera surveillance, that these drugs were smuggled into Milosevic’s prison cell and he had deliberately taken them to escape to Moscow for treatment.

Now we are told that Milosevic’s body, "found no evidence of poison or medicines in concentrations that could have killed him, the U.N. war crimes tribunal said Friday."

This is a cover-up and a pathetic one at that. (Hat tip The TOMO REPORT.)

Evidently there are some descrepancies on the public proscess of defining Milosevic’s death. There is no doubt in my mind that Milosevic was involved in genocide. There cover-up conspiracy involves the usage of questionable engagement by a client organization to protect the Mohammedans in Bosnia until the West decided to engage Milosevic militarily. Who is that client?

None other than Al Qaeda, the already hostile Islamofascists that were hostile to America. Clinton of America and Britain sent al Qaeda commandos into Serbia/Bosnia until diplomacy ran its course for NATO forces to engage Milosevic. All this occured with the complicity of the United Nations.

So there is the rub. Too many interests in the West and the United Nations could not risk being exposed working with terrorists to bring down a head of State involved with genocide.


Milosevic Autopsy: The Murderers Clear Themselves
Move along, nothing to see here

By Paul Joseph Watson

March 17, 2006

First we were told Milosevic died of natural causes.

Then we were told Milosevic committed suicide.

Then we were told Milosevic’s body contained drugs that counteracted the effect of his regular heart drugs.

Then we were told, under 24 hour armed guard and camera surveillance, that these drugs were smuggled into Milosevic’s prison cell and he had deliberately taken them to escape to Moscow for treatment.

Now we are told that Milosevic’s body, "found no evidence of poison or medicines in concentrations that could have killed him, the U.N. war crimes tribunal said Friday."

This is a cover-up and a pathetic one at that.

Milosevic wrote a letter one day before his death claiming he was being poisoned to death in jail. The lawyer who advised Milosevic during his trial, Azdenko Tomanovic, showed journalists a handwritten letter in which Milosevic wrote: "They would like to poison me. I’m seriously concerned and worried."

Milosevic’s trial was coming to an end and the only verifiable evidence to emerge from it was proof that the real Butcher’s of Serbia were Wes Clark and Bill Clinton. The US government’s financial and military support of Al-Qaeda, after the embassy bombings, was also being exposed.

Milosevic, just like Saddam Hussein when his testimony was shut off after he discussed the US’ role in staging bombings in Iraq, had to be silenced and the trial prematurely aborted before its credibility completely collapsed.

We are always watching a rigged game. Every time the US or British government’s are caught red-handed engaging in acts of unparalleled criminality, they always fight tooth and nail to avoid any proper investigation. Then when they finally relent and allow an investigation to take place the furore completely dies down. The criminals then appoint members of their own gang to investigate themselves and then quietly absolve themselves of any blame.

The 9/11 Commission, Lord Steven’s Diana investigation and the De Menezes shooting inquiry are all shining examples of this fraud. Did you really believe for a second that the Dutch, the only NATO country to vote in Parliament in favor of illegal aggression would conduct a fair autopsy? The first Yugoslav jet was shot down by a Dutch warplane.

I have no doubt that in the coming months and year’s we will have certifiable stone-clad proof that Milosevic was murdered, to add to the already overwhelming evidence. No doubt the criminals will again lavish us with another phony rigged investigation in the hope that time will wash away their bloody fingerprints.



Saudis Break Promise on Israel Trade

Fifty-seven Mohammedan nations are meeting in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia to contemplate ways and means to strengthen an economic boycott against the land of Israel. This is not conspiracy theory, rather it is conspiracy fact.
The point that enrages me is that the United States cooperates with many of these Mohammedan nations as allies. The host nation for this international conspiracy is supposed to be one of America’s chief allies. Indeed, Saudi Arabia had made a promise to the American government not to participate in said conspiracy.
This is continuing evidence of Mohammedan duplicity is the fact that Saudi Arabia is not only participating bur also hosting this conspiratorial conference. Here is the duplicity: Mohammedans lie to the whom they call the fakir – nonbelievers.
Saudis Break Promise on Israel Trade
Kingdom to Host International Boycott Parley
March 07, 2006
By: ICEJ News
Despite a promise made to Washington last November to drop its economic boycott of Israel, Saudi Arabia is moving forward with plans to host a major international conference next week aimed at promoting a continued trade embargo on the Jewish state, reports The Jerusalem Post.

The Post also found that Riyadh continues to prohibit entry to products made in Israel or to foreign-made goods containing Israeli components, contrary to the conditions placed on Saudi entry to the World Trade Organization in November 2005.

In a recent telephone interview, the commissioner for the Islamic Office for the Boycott of Israel said that all 57 Muslim nations would attend and discuss ways to "strengthen the boycott."

In US Senate hearings last month, the Bush administration’s trade representative, Rob Portman, insisted that the Saudis "have a responsibility to treat Israel as any other member of the WTO. We’ve received assurances from Saudi Arabia (that) they will abide by their WTO commitments."

Nonetheless, The Post has found that Saudi customs officials continue to enforce the boycott, asserting that no Israeli-made goods be brought into the country.

Soviets blamed in pope shooting

Talk about Conspiracy Theory! A Commission in the Italian Parliament has concluded that the Soviets attempted the assassination of Pope John Paul II. Of course the present Russian government denies that the old Soviet regime had any involvement in putting the Turkish Mohammedan up to the assassination, nonetheless this Commission of the Italian Parliament is convinced. Many people think the Soviets and Cuba’s Castro had a hand in the Kennedy assassination. Would it be nice to implement such decisiveness on the culprits in Kennedy’s demise? After all, the Soviets are no more and so there is no need for plausible deniability for Russia. Unless … Unless the new Russia is still intent on relinquishing American global hegemony.
[Hat tip to] 
By Victor L. Simpson
March 3, 2006

ROME — An Italian parliamentary commission concluded "beyond any reasonable doubt" that the Soviet Union was behind the 1981 attempt to kill Pope John Paul II — a theory long proffered but never proved, according to a draft report made available yesterday.
The commission held that the pope was a danger to the Soviet bloc because of his support for the Solidarity labor movement in his native Poland. Solidarity was the first free trade union in communist Eastern Europe.

"This commission believes, beyond any reasonable doubt, that the leaders of the Soviet Union took the initiative to eliminate the pope Karol Wojtyla," said a draft of the commission’s report obtained by the Associated Press. Wojtyla was John Paul’s Polish surname.
Russia’s military intelligence service called the charges "absolutely absurd," Agence France-Presse reported from Moscow.
"All affirmations about any involvement of Soviet intelligence services, including the military secret service, in the attempted assassination of the pope are absolutely absurd and have nothing to do with reality," the Interfax news agency quoted an intelligence spokesman as saying.
The panel’s draft has no bearing on any judicial investigations, which long have been closed. If the commission approves the report in its final form, that would mark the first time an official body had blamed the Soviet Union for shooting John Paul.
The report also said a photograph shows that a Bulgarian man, who was acquitted of involvement in the May 13, 1981, assassination attempt, was in St. Peter’s Square when the pontiff was shot by Mehmet Ali Agca.
The Bulgarian secret service was working for Soviet military intelligence, but the Italian court held that the evidence was insufficient to convict the Bulgarians in the plot.
Agca, a Turk, has changed his story often, and investigators said it was never clear for whom he was working. He initially blamed the Soviets.
Agca served 19 years in an Italian prison for shooting the pope and then 51/2 years in Turkey for killing journalist Abdi Ipekci.
He was released from a Turkish prison Jan. 12 but returned days later when prosecutors said he must serve more of his 10-year term for killing Mr. Ipekci. Agca will be released in 2010.
The Italian commission originally was established to investigate any penetration by the Soviet intelligence agency KGB of Italy during the Cold War.
The commission president, Sen. Paolo Guzzanti, said he decided to investigate the 1981 shooting after John Paul said in his book "Memory and Identity: Conversations Between Millenniums" that "someone else planned it, someone else commissioned it." The book came out shortly before the pope’s death last year.
The report said the commission used all the evidence gathered during trials in Italy as well as information given by French anti-terrorism Judge Jean-Louis Bruguiere.
All site contents copyright © 1999 – 2006 News World Communications, Inc.

Temple Mount call for world-wide Moslem rule

Islamofascism, the scourge of the twenty-first century has an agenda for world domination. That agenda will mean death, destruction and dhimmitude to non-believing Mohammedans.
Mohammedan Islamofascists are becoming more and more bold in proclaiming this agenda. A Mohammedan preacher – Sheik Ismail Nawahda – has called for the re-establishment of a global Mohammedan Khalifate. The call is a call to violent Jihad as executed by the pseudo-prophet Mohammed in the Seventh Century AD.

Noteworthy News Links
Possible prophecy and current event connections . . .

Prophecy Connections

Paula Yingst


Muslim Preacher on Temple Mount: Restore Worldwide Islamic Rule

By Hillel Fendel

Arutz Sheva,  February 26, 2006

Sheikh Ismail Nawahda, preaching to Moslem masses on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem on Friday, has brought it out into the open: the call to restore the Moslem Khalifate, or, "Genuine Islamic Rule."

A plan for the "Return of the Khalifate" was published secretly in 2002 by a group called "The Guiding Helper Foundation." The group explained that it wished to "give direction to the educated Muslim populace in its increasing interest in the establishment of Islam as a practical system of rule."

This past Friday, Feb. 24, however, the plan went public. Sheikh Nawahda called publicly for the renewal of the Islamic Khalifate, which would "unite all the Moslems in the world against the infidels."

The Khalifate system features a leader, known as a Khalif, who heads worldwide Islam. Assisted by a ten-man council, his decisions are totally binding on all Moslems.

According to the Foundation’s vision of the Khalifate, significant punishment can only be meted out for 14 crimes, including "accusing a chaste person of fornication," "not performing the formal prayer," and "not fasting during Ramadan."

The Foundation recommends working to restore the Moslem dictatorship using a system of small groups around the world. The purpose is so that the "enemies of Islam" who "will definitely try to stop us" will have a "much harder task, if not impossible, if they are faced with a myriad of small groups of differing locations, ethnicities," etc. This method also "ensures that if one group… is found and cut off, other similar groups will remain undetected."

Sheikh Nawahda reminded his Temple Mount audience that the first step taken by Muhammed in stabilizing his rule was to form the nucleus of the first Islamic country in the city of Medina. Nawahda also said that the status of Moslems around the world has dropped drastically ever since the collapse of the last Khalifate in 1924, after Turkey became a democratic republic.

Nawahda called upon the Arabs of the Palestinian Authority to rise above their personal and party interests, and said that Moslems must return to Islam and join forces in the struggle against the West. He praised the worldwide protests against the anti-Muhammed cartoons, and encouraged the Moslem public to continue such activities. He implied that those who insulted Muhammed are liable for death. The Sheikh designated the Moslem masses as a strong point that can be utilized in the fight against the West.

How Chinagate led to 9/11 (or The Eighth UN Secretary General)

My fellow Neocons, are you aware of the rumors of former President William Jefferson Clinton is setting his sights on becoming the next Secretary-General of the United Nations, replacing Kofi (I did not touch oil for food money) Annan? And further, did you know that Clinton purposely set walls between the communication ability of various Inteligence and Police organizations of the federal government? Why? To obstruct and obfuscate investigations into Clinton’s various personal scandals such as Chinagate.

How Chinagate led to 9/11 (or The Eighth UN Secretary General)
David Campbell
Feb 27 2006 08:45PM

And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast. 

 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him? 

 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months. 

 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven. 

 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations (as United Nations Secretary General). 

 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. 


If any man have an ear, let him hear. (Revelation 13: 3-9 {parenthesis mine})

China, as a permanet member of the UN Security Council has a prominent role to play in the appointment of the Eighth Secretary General of the UN. The symbol of the DRAGON is no coincidence. The whole world (unsaved mankind) worships the dragon (satan) and Baal through Chinese exports. Power is given through Baal worship!


How Chinagate Led to 9/11


By Jean Pearce 

May 25, 2004


As the 9/11 Commission tries to uncover what kept intelligence agencies from preventing September 11, it has overlooked two vital factors: Jamie Gorelick and Bill Clinton. Gorelick, who has browbeaten the current administration, helped erect the walls between the FBI, CIA and local investigators that made 9/11 inevitable. However, she was merely expanding the policy Bill Clinton established with Presidential Decision Directive 24. What has been underreported is why the policy came about: to thwart investigations into the Chinese funding of Clinton’s re-election campaign, and the favors he bestowed on them in return.

In April, staff writer Scott Wheeler reported that a senior U.S. government official and three other sources claimed that the 1995 memo written by Jamie Gorelick, who served as the Clinton Justice Department’s deputy attorney general from 1994 to 1997, created "a roadblock" to the investigation of illegal Chinese donations to the Democratic National Committee. But the picture is much bigger than that. The Gorelick memo, which blocked intelligence agents from sharing information that could have halted the September 11 hijacking plot, was only the mortar in a much larger maze of bureaucratic walls whose creation Gorelick personally oversaw.


It’s a story the 9/11 Commission may not want to hear, and one that Gorelick – now incredibly a member of that commission – has so far refused to tell. But it is perhaps the most crucial one to understanding the intentional breakdown of intelligence that led to the September 11 disaster.


Nearly from the moment Gorelick took office in the Clinton Justice Department, she began acting as the point woman for a large-scale bureaucratic reorganization of intelligence agencies that ultimately placed the gathering of intelligence, and decisions about what – if anything – would be done with it under near-direct control of the White House. In the process, more than a dozen CIA and FBI investigations underway at the time got caught beneath the heel of the presidential boot, investigations that would ultimately reveal massive Chinese espionage as millions in illegal Chinese donations filled Democratic Party campaign coffers.


When Gorelick took office in 1994, the CIA was reeling from the news that a Russian spy had been found in CIA ranks, and Congress was hungry for a quick fix. A month after Gorelick was sworn in, Bill Clinton issued Presidential Decision Directive 24. PDD 24 put intelligence gathering under the direct control of the president’s National Security Council, and ultimately the White House, through a four-level, top-down chain of command set up to govern (that is, stifle) intelligence sharing and cooperation between intelligence agencies. From the moment the directive was implemented, intelligence sharing became a bureaucratic nightmare that required negotiating a befuddling bureaucracy that stopped directly at the President’s office.


First, the directive effectively neutered the CIA by creating a National Counterintelligence Center (NCI) to oversee the Agency. NCI was staffed by an FBI agent appointed by the Clinton administration. It also brought multiple international investigations underway at the time under direct administrative control. The job of the NCI was to “implement counterintelligence activities,” which meant that virtually everything the CIA did, from a foreign intelligence agent’s report to polygraph test results, now passed through the intelligence center that PDD 24 created.


NCI reported to an administration-appointed National Counterintelligence Operations Board (NCOB) charged with “discussing counterintelligence matters.” The NCOB in turn reported to a National Intelligence Policy Board, which coordinated activities between intelligence agencies attempting to work together. The policy board reported “directly” to the president through the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs.


The result was a massive bureaucratic roadblock for the CIA – which at the time had a vast lead on the FBI in foreign intelligence – and for the FBI itself, which was also forced to report to the NCOB. This hampered cooperation between the two entities. All this occurred at a time when both agencies were working separate ends of investigations that would eventually implicate China in technology transfers and the Democratic Party in a Chinese campaign cash grab.


And the woman charged with selling this plan to Congress, convincing the media and ultimately implementing much of it? Jamie Gorelick.


Many in Congress, including some Democrats, found the changes PDD 24 put in place baffling: they seemed to do nothing to insulate the CIA from infiltration while devastating the agency’s ability to collect information. At the time, Democrat House Intelligence Chairman Dan Glickman referred to the plan as “regulatory gobbledygook." Others questioned how FBI control of CIA intelligence would foster greater communication between the lower levels of the CIA and FBI, now that all information would have to be run through a multi-tier bureaucratic maze that only went upward.


Despite their doubts, Gorelick helped the administration sell the plan on Capitol Hill. The Directive stood.


But that wasn’t good enough for the Clinton administration, which wanted control over every criminal and intelligence investigation, domestic and foreign, for reasons that would become apparent in a few years. For the first time in Justice Department history, a political appointee, Richard Scruggs – an old crony or Attorney General Janet Reno’s from Florida – was put in charge of the Office of Intelligence and Policy Review (OIPR). OIPR is the Justice Department agency in charge of requesting wiretap and surveillance authority for criminal and intelligence investigations on behalf of investigative agencies from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court. The court’s activities are kept secret from the public.


A year after PDD 24, with the new bureaucratic structure loaded with administration appointees, Gorelick drafted the 1995 memo Attorney General John Ashcroft mentioned while testifying before the 9/11 Commission. The Gorelick memo, and other supporting memos released in recent weeks, not only created walls within the intelligence agencies that prevented information sharing among their own agents, but effectively walled these agencies off from each other and from outside contact with the U.S. prosecutors instrumental in helping them gather the evidence needed to make the case for criminal charges.


The only place left to go with intelligence information – particularly for efforts to share intelligence information or obtain search warrants – was straight up Clinton and Gorelick’s multi-tiered chain of command. Instead, information lethal to the Democratic Party languished inside the Justice Department, trapped behind Gorelick’s walls.


The implications were enormous. In her letter of protest to Attorney General Reno over Gorelick’s memo, United States Attorney Mary Jo White spelled them out: “These instructions leave entirely to OIPR and the (Justice Department) Criminal Division when, if ever, to contact affected U.S. attorneys on investigations including terrorism and espionage,” White wrote. (Like OIPR, the Criminal Division is also part of the Justice Department.)


Without an enforcer, the walls Gorelick’s memo put in place might not have held. But Scruggs acted as that enforcer, and he excelled at it. Scruggs maintained Gorelick’s walls between the FBI and Justice’s Criminal Division by threatening to automatically reject any FBI request for a wiretap or search warrant if the Bureau contacted the Justice Department’s Criminal Division without permission. This deprived the FBI, and ultimately the CIA, of gathering advice and assistance from the Criminal Division that was critical in espionage and terrorist cases.


It is no coincidence that this occurred at the same time both the FBI and the CIA were churning up evidence damaging to the Democratic Party, its fundraisers, the Chinese and ultimately the Clinton administration itself. Between 1994 and the 1996 election, as Chinese dollars poured into Democratic coffers, Clinton struggled to reopen high-tech trade to China. Had agents confirmed Chinese theft of weapons technology or its transfer of weapons technology to nations like Pakistan, Iran and Syria, Clinton would have been forced by law and international treaty to react.


Gorelick’s appointment to the job at Justice in 1994 occurred during a period in which the FBI had begun to systematically investigate technology theft by foreign powers. For the first time, these investigations singled out the U.S. chemical, telecommunications, aircraft and aerospace industries for intelligence collection.


By the time Gorelick wrote the March 1995 memo that sealed off American intelligence agencies from each other and the outside world, all of the most critical Chinagate investigations by American intelligence agencies were already underway. Some of their findings were damning:


  • In an investigation originally instigated by the CIA, the FBI was beginning its search for the source of the leak of W-88 nuclear warhead technology to China among the more than 1,000 people who had access to the secrets. Despite Justice Department stonewalling and the Department’s refusal to seek wiretap authority in 1997, the investigation eventually led to Wen Ho Lee and the Los Alamos National Laboratory.
  • The FBI first collected extensive evidence in 1995 linking illegal Democratic Party donations to China, according to the Congressional Record. But Congress and the Director of the CIA didn’t find out about the Justice Department’s failure to act upon that evidence until 1997, safely after the 1996 election.
  • According to classified CIA documents leaked to the Washington Times, between 1994 and 1997, the CIA learned that China sold Iran missile technology, a nuclear fission reactor, advanced air-defense radar and chemical agents. The Chinese also provided 5,000 ring magnets to Pakistan, used in producing weapons-grade uranium. The Chinese also provided uranium fuel for India’s reactors.


In many cases the CIA resorted to leaking classified information to the media, in an effort to bypass the administration’s blackout.


Gorelick knew these facts well. While Clinton may have refused to meet with top CIA officials, Gorelick didn’t. According to a 1996 report by the legal news service American Lawyer Media, Gorelick and then-Deputy Director of the CIA George Tenet met every other week to discuss intelligence and intelligence sharing.


But those in the Clinton administration weren’t the only ones to gain from the secrecy. In 1994, the McDonnell Douglas Corporation transferred military-use machine tools to the China National Aero-Technology Import and Export Corporation that ended up in the hands of the Chinese army. The sale occurred despite Defense Department objections. McDonnell Douglas was a client of the Miller Cassidy Larroca & Lewin, L.L.P. (now called Baker Botts), the Washington, D.C., law firm where Gorelick worked for 17 years and was a partner. Ray Larroca, another partner in the firm, represented McDonnell in the Justice Department’s investigation of the technology transfer.

In 1995, General Electric, a former client of Gorelick’s, also had much to lose if the damaging information the CIA and the FBI had reached Congress. At the time, GE was publicly lobbying for a lucrative permit to assist the Chinese in replacing coal-fired power stations with nuclear plants. A 1990 law required that the president certify to Congress that China was not aiding in nuclear proliferation before U.S. companies could execute the business agreement.


Moreover, in 1995, Michael Armstrong, then the CEO of Hughes Electronics – a division of General Electric and another client of Miller Cassidy Larroca & Lewin – was publicly lobbying Clinton to switch satellite export controls from the State Department to the Commerce Department. After the controls were lifted, Hughes and another company gave sensitive data to the Chinese, equipment a Pentagon study later concluded would allow China to develop intercontinental and submarine-launched ballistic missiles aimed at American targets. Miller Cassidy Larroca & Lewin partner Randall Turk represented Hughes in the Congressional, State Department, and Justice Department investigations that resulted.


The Cox Report, which detailed Chinese espionage for Congress during the period, revealed that FBI surveillance caught Chinese officials frantically trying to keep Democratic donor Johnny Chung from divulging any information that would be damaging to Hughes Electronics. Chung funneled $300,000 in illegal contributions from the Chinese military to the DNC between 1994 and 1996.


It was this web of investigations that led Gorelick and Bill Clinton to erect the wall between intelligence agencies that resulted in the toppling of the Twin Towers. The connections go on and on, but they all lead back to Gorelick, the one person who could best explain how the Clinton administration neutered the American intelligence agencies that could have stopped the September 11 plot. Yet another high crime will have been committed if the September 11 Commission doesn’t demand testimony from her.




[Highlights are from SoundAnAlarm editors.]