"It is too true, however disgraceful it may be to human nature, that nations in general will make war whenever they have a prospect of getting anything by it; nay, absolute monarchs will often make war when their nations are to get nothing by it, but for the purposes and objects merely personal, such as thirst for military glory, revenge for personal affronts, ambition, or private compacts to aggrandize or support their particular families or partisans. These and a variety of other motives, which affect only the mind of the sovereign, often lead him to engage in wars not sanctified by justice or the voice and interests of his people. But, independent of these inducements to war, which are more prevalent in absolute monarchies, but which well deserve our attention, there are others which affect nations as often as kings; and some of them will on examination be found to grow out of our relative situation and circumstances."

—John Jay
Federalist No. 4
The Federalist Papers

By Darren Weeks

I love shortwave.

I especially enjoy listening to it at night, when my corner of the world is at peace — everyone is asleep and all is quiet. I will often go out on my deck here in my country home in southern Michigan.

As I gaze up at the stars in the night sky, I thank my dear Heavenly Father, that I have been blessed enough to breathe the air of freedom. I thank Him that I do not live in a land that is torn by war. And I pray for those who, at this very moment, are suffering from the violence of real terrorism.

I love my country. I love the basic principles upon which she was founded. Principles which are reflected by our Constitution. Principles which our government is now pretending do not exist. Or, in the name of defending those principles, they are attempting to remove them, while invading sovereign nations and overthrowing their form of government.

This leads me back to my shortwave radio.

I listened this evening to Radio Habana Cuba, as they reported that our American soldiers opened fire on a crowd of civilians, killing at least thirteen of them. The soldiers had said that they were fired upon, but — according to this report — witnesses of the event said that the Iraqi civilians had actually just thrown rocks at the soldiers, because they resent having U.S. military occupying their country.

I do not believe the report to be false propaganda. I think it is probably true.

And I am deeply chagrined. I am saddened almost to the point of tears, as I consider the poor Iraqi people, who have done nothing to deserve this.

For decades they have tasted the bitter cup of war. For over a decade, they have been starved by sanctions, imposed upon them by the U.S. government and the United Nations. They have been continually bombed since the first Gulf war, an item that has gone unreported by the American media.

Sitting on my deck this night, all is quiet. Not even a dog barks. I experience peace. Tranquility is my portion.

In fact, it would be easy to forget the fate of those in the Middle East, were it not for my shortwave Grundig, which reminds me of the turmoil, distress, and heartache. And the fact that much of it is being caused by American Armed Forces, which are commanded by a government that has long given up on the cause of liberty and the Constitution.

It now favors the establishment of a socialist world order, devoid of freedom, privacy, and happiness. It favors conquering one nation after another to further enrich and extend the imperialist nation of Israel. And it doesn't seem to care how many innocents must be murdered to accomplish its morbid agenda — including its own American citizens.

And in Iraq, we continue to kill innocent civilians, in their own homeland, for merely having the guts to object.

Americans everywhere, blind to the plight of the "enemy," wave their Chinese-made American flags. They sing, God bless America, and sport signs that encourage support for our troops.

I ache. I want to support the troops, because they are my fellow Americans. Many of them are my friends, or family of my friends. But I cannot support the policies of a government which seeks to enslave its people, and the people of other countries.

Why am I among the few who care about those innocents? Why am I in the minority, when I consider the cost of the lives on both sides of the conflicts?

I cannot sing God Bless America, for I believe it is unreasonable to expect God to bless a country that has done so wickedly.

I wonder how long it will be before the terrorists — not Arabs with boxcutters, like we've been told — but the real terrorists, will murder us again. How long will it be, before American blood again runs in the streets as a justification for yet another invasion, another war, against another sovereign nation of innocent people? As Julius Caesar said,

“Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged sword. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind. And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of the citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism, will offer up all of their rights unto the leader and gladly so. How do I know? For this is what I have done. And I am Caesar.”

God Bless America? Nay, I say God have mercy upon America. And protect her children from the diabolical demons who are their leaders.

By Darren Weeks

I understand that the state of Oregon is studying the possibility of using Global Positioning System (GPS) units to track the mileage of the that state's residents. This is purportedly so that they can create a new "road use" tax.

Apparently, it isn't enough that the government steals your hard-earned cash in the form of gasoline taxes. Now, they want to add another tax for the same thing that the gas tax was supposed to be used.

In a CNS article from earlier this year, Jim Whitty, administrator of Oregon's Road User Fee Task Force defended the idea on the basis that, "it costs a certain amount to drive on the road per vehicle and people ought to pay their fair share of their usage."

Hey, Mr. Whitty, we already do!

How many times have you heard someone in government attempting to use that phrase, "their fair share." We've heard it used by politicians over and over and over again, to sell their class-envy ideas pertaining to the Marxist progressive income tax. Now, they're doing it again with the road-use tax.

Why do politicians keep using these same tactics, promoting "fairness" in public policy? Why do they keep claiming the need for change, based upon the ill-conceived notion that existing policies aren't "fair" because they tilt in favor of a certain group? Apparently, they do it because it works.

And have you ever noticed that the remedy, is always for the particular group to pay more not less?

When was the last time a politician went on television and said, "It's not fair that Group X pays so little in taxes, while Group Y doesn't. So we need tax reform to remedy this problem. So what we're going to do, is lower your taxes, you people of Group Y. And then everything will be fair. Because we all know how important in a free society that fairness is."

No, the solution is never to lower your taxes, but to raise them.

And, by the way, while we're on the subject, who says everything in this life has to be fair? I don't recall ever reading about "fairness" in the Constitution. Since when was that word added?

To be sure, the rights that are recognized in the Bill of Rights are basic human rights. And their recognition is intended to establish guidelines by which government will treat all citizens with the same fairness. But it doesn't guarantee that everyone will make the same income, or pay the same amount of tax. I'll tell you what system of government does guarantee you those things. It's practiced in places like Cuba, and China. It's called Communism. It is the "fair" system of government. Everyone makes the same, and everyone pays the same. And no one has anything. Frankly, I'd prefer a little unfairness, thank you.

Quoting from CNS News:

Noting that gas taxes are unfair because of the large differences in the fuel economy of automobiles, Whitty and the task force explored alternative taxing methods to ensure equity among drivers. Seventy-percent of Oregon's road maintenance revenues currently comes from federal and state gas taxes.

Commission members rejected the idea of using automobile odometer readings to track mileage because they figured some people would accumulate out-of-state mileage. The idea of raising the existing gasoline tax was also turned down because with automobiles becoming so fuel efficient, gas tax revenues are projected to dry up."

First of all, people of Oregon, if you allow them to get away with this, rest assurred that they will not only implement this road-use tax, but they will raise your gasoline taxes as well. They're not going to do this instead of raising gasoline taxes, contrary to what Mr. Whitty — who is quite witty, in a very diabolical way — tries to tell you.

Secondly, we are repeatedly reminded how horrible those highly popular, gas-guzzling Sport Utility Vehicles (SUVs) are by the environmentalists. Despite their repeated demonization, SUVs remain the vehicle of choice for soccer moms, and others who are concerned about safety. As long as that is the case, certainly gasoline tax revenues will be safe long into the future.

The point is that they are using fuel-efficiency, as an argument for creating a new tax. And they want to use one of the most intrusive systems available — in terms of your privacy — to levy the tax. Because with GPS units, the government is able to track your every move. Maybe that's really the idea. Maybe the road-use tax is just a fringe benefit for them in their ever-increasing role in your life.

I strongly urge all Oregonians to say no to this hideous idea. You might call your state legislator and tell them that if revenues are so bad, why don't they quit sending your hard-earned tax dollars to Washington, where they're wasted, and return to the state with strings attached. You won't need federal highway funds if you don't send the money to them in the first place.

What is the federal government going to do if the state doesn't pony up the cash? Arrest your state legislators? If they're willing to go along with a plan like this road-use tax, then arresting them might be a step in the right direction. Just have them start with the Governor.

By Darren Weeks

I just happened across the funniest article I've seen in a long time! The reason it struck me as amusing, is only because I can totally relate to what the writer has endured with Verisign/Network Soulutions, Inc.

After attempting several times to change my DNS servers within the Verisign/NSI system asylum, I finally was forced to transfer my domains away from Verisign/NSI. Luckily, unlike the poor fellow in the article that you are about to read, I still had my old e-mail address that I originally had used when I registered my first domain name, doubters.net.

After successful transfer of my domains, I was elated! I had felt like I had escaped a prison and was now a free man! I now had control of my domains, instead of being enslaved to an entity that took my money annually — and a lot of it, by the way — and provided the worse excuse for service imaginable.

So, when I read the following article, I couldn't help but laugh. It's so true!

If you're not a webmaster, one thing you need to understand in order to really appreciate this story, is that a few years ago, Network Solutions was the only company in existence that registered domains. They had won the contract with the government for domain name registration and they were a monopoly. If you wanted a domain for your site, you had to pay NSI $70 for a two-year contract on your domain. Renewals were then $35 per year. If you wanted more than one domain, you had better get ready to shell out the bucks!

It might have been better, had the company provided good service once you were a client.

Unfortunately, even the most routine account alteration — such as change of contact information, etc — was a nightmare. They had a bunch of forms that you were suppose to print out, fill out, fax, or copy into your e-mail client, and mail to NSI. Again, this would not be a problem if you knew which form that you were supposed to fill out. But alas, the dear ones at NSI had apparently gone weeks, perhaps even months, without sleep in their quest to make the process — every process you attempted to undertake — as painful as being gang-raped by a herd of baboons!

At any rate, I'll let Rick Bradley tell you his story, as it is similar to my experience.

Back in the day, Network Solutions was where you went to register a domain name. They charged $35 a year (not quite highway robbery, but at least a footpath mugging), with a 2-year minimum, had pretty crappy customer service, and you had no other choice, so you took what they gave you, AND YOU LIKED IT. Well, not really, but you took it.

Fast forward a few frames and Verisign owns what was NetworkSolutions and the rest of the domain market has opened up. There's an open registry now and actual competition between registrars on price, value-added features (hosting, email, disposable websites, etc.), and quality of service. You can get domains for well under $10 a year, with free DNS forwarding, butt-cheap web and pop3 hosting -- all from people happy to serve you and excited to get your business. OR, you can pay Verisign $35 a year (now officially highway robbery), get crap, and get jerked around for it. Over the past couple of years Verisign has used a slew of dirty tricks (like the "time to renew your domain!" courtesy notice which is actually an authorization to switch over to Verisign -- I've got a couple of these in my files in case you're a Verisign lawyer thinking of getting your libel suit on. Just try me.) to steal customers away from other services, and they've gotten in the habit of refusing (for no reason) legitimate transfer requests by owners trying to move their domains to non-ruined registrars.

Also back in the day: I registered a domain (roundeye.net -- if you don't already know, don't ask) with NetworkSolutions. Since then I've registered a number of other domains, all with other registrars, some good, some bad. Being the path of least resistance I left roundeye.net with Network Solutions for quite some time. Eventually I moved to Texas and did something stupid -- I left the contact address for roundeye.net set to my old BellSouth email address -- but I no longer was on BellSouth.

I tried to update my contact information, but I couldn't communicate with NetSol through my contact addres. No problem, since I'd set up an alternate authentication via password that I could access through their web servers. Only... the password no longer worked. Yes, it was the correct password, but it didn't work. Well, o.k., since there was an interface to answer the challenge question you'd selected. Nope, no dice. Evidently I don't know my own personal history.

At this point those of you who have dealt with NetSol/Verishit before are cringing. You know what comes next, and it's not pretty.

Ostensibly in order to reduce fraud, stolen domains, the painful drawn-out death of infant children from bitrot, etc., Verisign has an elaborate fax-based authentication procedure, rife with independent points of catastrophic failure (both human and technological), and designed from the ground up with plausible deniability as a prime consideration. The way it is claimed to work involves filing a ticket on their website, faxing the ticket number and a copy of an id plus a bill with your address on it, and waiting for the email that tells you everything is now Right With the World.

The way things actually go is like this:

You get lost amongst the various possible forms that purport to do something like what you want. The 3 conflicting FAQs that turn up on the matter do little to resolve the situation. After a couple of browser crashes and a switch to a different unsupported browser, and back, you eventually get a form submitted that looks like it will work.
After a day of no response you go back and do the whole thing again.

With any luck a 30Kb auto-response comes back at 4am.

After extracting the ticket data and following the various links in the auto-response to eventually find a faxable form (and two more conflicting FAQ/help documents) you get the form printed.

After photocopying your driver's license and enough identifying material to get you through the Brandenburg Gate, you shove it into the fax machine (bonus points if, like me, you're at the time an office-appliance Luddite living on the Mexican border getting hit for $5 a fax at the local copy shop) a couple of times before it goes through properly.
If you're impatient you send the fax again the next day and really screw things up later when Verisign refuses to process multiple requests on the same domain/account (whichever is less convenient) "for security reasons"

After a day or two, with any luck, you receive another 30kb auto-response telling you that your fax was received, along with some identifying numbers, etc., and that they'll be back to you Real Soon Now.

About a week later you call Network Solutions and talk to 4 or 5 different people (all of whom are either nursing Amway freebase habits or studying from the Colonel Klink Management Textbook Series), the last of which you pester enough to finally get a fragment of information about your account.

Basically, despite the auto-email to the contrary (the numbers in which mysteriously don't correspond to actual transactions in their system), your fax was never received.
Attempts to corroborate receipt by any of 34 different pieces of identifying information all fail.

You can: attempt to perform the process again, yell and scream a lot at the Veribots on the other end of the line, attempt to transfer the domain away, or just wait for a while and pay $35 to renew for another year (which is the whole point of this exercise anyway from Verisign's point of view), or let the domain expire and hope you can re-register it later.

Let me help you out a bit, since I tried all of these (except the expiry), some multiple times: none of them will ever satisfy you.

Not being able to get access to my BellSouth email I couldn't transfer the domain (since I couldn't ever change the contact info). Finally, I moved back to BellSouth territory. I decided to get DSL from BellSouth again. When I got service set up I went ahead and registered for a second email mailbox and was thrilled to find that my old BellSouth address was available. I grabbed it and made sure it still worked. This week I went over to DirectNIC (not the cheapest domain registrar, but their management tools and customer service are excellent) and filed a transfer request for roundeye.net. After jumping through the proper hoops it appears that either Verisign has stopped wrongfully denying transfers, or I just got lucky (I'm putting my money on the latter) -- I finally got the damned domain away from them.

Which is why I now feel I can finally go on record without Verisign having something to hold over my head:

If you ever consider doing business with Verisign (/Network Solutions), for any reason, I strongly recommend you reconsider. They are a cyst on the groin of the Internet. Do not support them. Pray for their failure and the safe reemployment of all those unwitting workers too unfortunate to have a better place to work.

And to anyone at Verisign reading this, barring the 5.88% of people I spoke to at Verisign who were actually civil, I just want to say, "F#*@ you and the sorry a$$ backroom politicking you rode in on."

Without being quite as frank, I have to echo Rick's sentiment. Do yourself a favor and avoid this company like the plague!

And if anyone from Verisign happens to read this, instead of trying to sue, how about making some improvements in your service so that you can compete? Because I have a feeling that the only reason you are still in business is that you have so many people and companies from the past trapped in your system like rats, they have no choice but to continue paying $35 a year and putting up with what's probably the worst internet company in dot com history.

Sooner or later, the last of your clients will either give up and let their domains expire out of frustration, or they'll finally figure out a way to escape the dungeon of despair that is your company.

By Darren Weeks

It never ceases to amaze me how those in charge of our government manage to control every thought of the population. And if one doesn't agree with the thoughts and agenda of the controllers, then they are ridiculed, put down, jeered and even threatened.

I think about the complete all-out attack on the country of France that has swept the public mindset. Just because the French didn't assist the United States in overthrowing a sovereign country's government, when there was absolutely no evidence that government was a threat to us, we now have "freedom fries" instead of french fries. Our formally french toast, has been replaced by "freedom toast."

Well, pardon moi, if I don't join in the frenzy, but I believe that the irony is worse than disturbing. It's Orwellian.

A case in point is what happened last month to the Dixie Chicks. During a concert appearance in London, singer Natalie Maines made a comment that they, the Dixie Chicks, were "ashamed the President of the United States is from Texas."

Of course, that comment set off no small firestorm of criticism! You'd have thought she had insulted someone's religion. The whirlwind of scorching commentary that ensued, finally caused the Dixie Chicks to issue a statement.

"The anti-American sentiment that has unfolded here (in London) is astounding. While we support our troops, there is nothing more frightening than the notion of going to war with Iraq and the prospect of all the innocent lives that will be lost ... I feel the president is ignoring the opinion of many in the U.S. and alienating the rest of the world. My comments were made in frustration, and one of the privileges of being an American is you are free to voice your own point of view."

Well, one thing that Ms. Maines apparently is yet to learn is the fact that being an American does not guarantee that you are free. It certainly does not guarantee you that you have the right to express your views — at least not without being punished.

Following the remark, the group found themselves dropped from country stations across the U.S. As one Reuters article put it:

Music superstars the Dixie Chicks are finding out that criticising President George W. Bush's plans for war in Iraq can cost you air play, big time. Country stations across the United States have pulled the Chicks from playlists following reports that lead singer Natalie Maines said in a concert in London earlier this week that she was "ashamed the president of the United States is from Texas."

So much for freedom of speech! And by the way, aren't we told that freedom is the reason we are engaged in this war?

Similar persecution has taken place on other fronts as well, such as Hollywood, where stars must either keep their mouths shut, or risk having their careers seriously curtailed.

The message seems to overwhelmingly be that either you will agree to knuckle under, and conform to the views that are acceptable, or you will be badgered, hounded, and harassed until you do. In some cases, even threatened.

A particular web site that I have often utilized to get the Arab point-of-view with regard to what has been happening in the Middle East is Al Jazeerah. This is not to be confused with the television network Al Jazeera, whose English version has been repeatedly censored by hackers, and Denial of Service attacks.

Al Jazeerah — which, unlike the official TV network site, has a "H" on the end of its name — is published by Dr. Hassan A. El-Najjar, of Dalton, Georgia. His site featured news articles, editorial commentaries, written by Arab publications and columnists. Here is Google's cache of Dr. Hassan's site prior to its being shut down. I found it very interesting being able to read the news from the perspective of the Arabs.

Unfortunately, Dr. Hassan was forced to shut his site down, after receiving numerous threats on his life. So much for freedom of speech!

George Orwell, in his book 1984, spoke of "thought crimes" and "face crimes."

We already have "hate crime" legislation, which effectively creates crimes of the mind. When freedom of speech is stifled to the point that no one can question or criticize the policies of their government without huge personal retribution, then thought and face crimes couldn't be far behind.

We must not forget the words of Johann W. von Goethe: "None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free."

Patriotism is wonderful, if genuine. Patriotism that is used to support ill-conceived policies, while smothering verbal opposition, is deadly.

By Darren Weeks

I was saddened to hear of the passing of a great physician, following a slip and fall accident, in which he bumped his head on the ice.

There are people that are placed upon this earth that touch lives. Some touch lives in good ways, some in bad ways. Dr. Robert C. Atkins was an impact for good.

As most of you are aware, Dr. Atkins has touched many lives with his revolutionary low-carb diet. I am one of those people.

Thus far, I have lost over 25 lbs. on the Atkins diet. And was able to do it within a very short period of time. And it wasn't difficult. In fact, it was probably the easiest diet that I've ever tried.

What attracted me to it, was the fact that everyone to whom I had ever spoken, that had tried it, had achieved significant success within a short period of time. The menu was so vast and appealing, I was considering giving it a shot.

When a friend of mine called me one night and told me that he was going to start the Atkins diet, I enthusiastically told him, "I'll do it with you!" It was a split decision that I have never regretted.

I wholeheartedly recommend the Atkins diet, and Dr. Atkins' book as a healthy alternative to the traditional low-fat, high-carb diets. High carb diets never worked for me. Atkins' works.

Dr. Atkins research will be missed, as will He — a true revolutionary. As I am fond of saying, he was a heavy-weight for the overweight.

God bless you, Dr. Atkins. May the angels on high lead you to your eternal rest.

By Darren Weeks

In my April 11th post, I gave some information about Saddam Hussein that isn't widely known. Information that suggests that, perhaps, he wasn't as big a villain as he is being portrayed by the controlled media.

An example of this can be found in Iraq's gun control policy — or rather, the lack of one.

During the entire tenure of the Hussein, any Iraqi could enter a gun store and buy a fully automatic weapon. Now, any history buff, worth their salt, can tell you: Oppressive regimes want to disarm the people — not have them well armed.

Hussein seemed to know that having a well armed population, will serve as a deterrent for crime. The founding fathers of this country wholly agree.

For example, George Washington, in a speech given to Congress on January 7, 1790 said:

"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence. From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."

As you read that quote, think about all of the times in today's media that you see firearms portrayed as wicked devices, that should only be trusted with those wearing a badge or a military uniform.

In an editorial of June 3, 2002, the Washington Times commented about how the debate was shifted from the spirit of the Founders, to the opinions of neo-liberal justices.

"Privately owned firearms were ubiquitous in America during the lifetimes of the Founding Fathers and well after that. It was taken as a given that individuals had the right to keep and bear arms. It was only the willful disregard of original intent and the clear statements of the Founders on the subject that allowed Franklin Roosevelt's activist, liberal Supreme Court in 1939 to disavow what had been a uniquely American birthright. Gun-control agitators have based all their arguments on the post-1939 history of federal regulation of firearms — and assiduously avoided any acknowledgement of what the Founders themselves wrote and intended. Thus, the social engineering of activist judges clearly hostile to the Constitution as written and determined to remake it more to their own liking has come to take precedence over what the Founders attempted to bequeath to subsequent generations of Americans."

To the Founding Fathers, guns were the equal to liberty, itself. The belief was that in a society where there are no guns, there will be no liberty. A truely free society must be a well-armed one.

Given that knowledge, how could Saddam Hussein be as big a monster as the media paints the picture? And now that the U.S.A. and, indirectly, Israel are in charge, how long will it be before the Iraqi people are disarmed? Knowing that tryrannical governments wish for their would-be subjects to be disarmed, what does that tell you about our own government since that plan for our eventual disarmament has already been formed into law?

By Darren Weeks

Recently, in this space, I commented about the Bush administration's conflicts-of-interest with respect to the "war on terror."

I spoke of W. Bush's insider trading scam (Harken Energy) that he engaged in during the early 90's, when his daddy was president. I also reminded the reader of the fact that Cheney is the former CEO of the Halliburton company.

During Cheney's tenure there, he was accused of helping Halliburton achieve huge government contracts, since Cheney, himself, has ties to government. Hence, there are many conflicts-of-interest that are not being questioned. At least not to the point that they ought to be.

I want to share with you a piece that I read in the Arab News, that was apparently originally published originally in the LA Times:

Size of Halliburton Reconstruction Deal Fuels Criticism

Mark Fineman, LA Times

WASHINGTON, 12 April 2003 — The Pentagon’s exclusive no-bid contract with a Halliburton Co. subsidiary for emergency oil-field services in Iraq could be worth as much as $7 billion over the next two years, according to a document made public Thursday.

The disclosure gave more fuel to critics of the deal, who said a contract that large should have been put out to open, competitive bidding.

“I was surprised about the size of the contract and the fact that they’re not going to have competitive bidding,’’ Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., said late Thursday. “I didn’t know we were talking about a contract of this magnitude.’’

The $7 billion ceiling was revealed in a letter to Waxman from Lt. Gen. Robert B. Flowers, the commanding general of the Army Corps of Engineers. Flowers called the amount a “worst-case damage’’ estimate from oil and gas fires in the war-torn country.

Flowers added in the April 8 letter that the Houston-based energy giant and its subcontractors were authorized to spend $50.3 million in the first month alone.

In a March 26 letter seeking more information on the deal from Flowers, Waxman expressed concern that the contract was awarded in secret and could range into the “tens of millions’’ of dollars. In public statements, the Army Corps has downplayed the size of the deal.

“This is not going to be a huge dollar contract — if nothing changes from today,’’ Lt. Gen. Gene Pawlik, an Army Corps spokesman, said last week.

In fact, only eight oil and gas wells and pipelines have been set ablaze to date. All but one fire have been extinguished either by subcontractors or by Kuwaiti Oil Co. firefighters.

But in a written response to Flowers on Thursday, Waxman questioned the decision to set the ceiling so high before officials had an idea of what the scope of the work would be.

I'll tell you the reason to set the ceiling so high: The higher the ceiling, the more money in the pockets of Cheney and other administration profiteers.

Let's not forget! We cannot question a president in war time. That's unpatriotic, we're told. If you dare question the motives of your commander-in-chief during a tumultous time such as this, then you, my friend, are an evil villain! You are un-American, and do not support the soldiers overseas! Right?

Wrong! My fellow Americans, you had better reject this lie from hell and begin to ask the questions that need to be asked.

Back to the article:

“Why did the Army Corps issue a two-year, $7 billion contract to perform work that is intended to be short-term and limited in nature?’’ he asked. “It may be the case that the administration had valid reasons for granting a sole-source contract for emergency work during armed hostilities. It is harder to understand, however, what the rationale would be for a sole-source contract that has a multi-year duration and a multibillion-dollar price tag. Yet this appears to be the type of contract that was awarded.’’

The answer, again, to the question of why should the contract for rebuilding Iraq be so high is, Why not? If they can get away with it, then why wouldn't they?

We have phony conservatives (controlled opposition) in the media telling the public that it's unpatriotic to question or criticize the president at a time of war. The congressional leaders at the federal level have been bribed and/or threatened not to say too much. The few who do, are generally ridiculed into silence, or charactorized by the media as playing politics.

The few celebrities that dare speak out, are also often shamed into offering apologies. Some have been further punished by having their movie roles yanked from them.

The prevailing attitude of "rolling with the punches," is dangerous at best! Submitting to the prevailing notion that we must be silent on matters that affect our freedom and the well-being of our nation, just because there is a crisis brewing, gives way too much power to those in charge.

If this attitude is allowed to be the defining component in determining what speech is acceptable, then count on the fact, Americans, that those in power will always see to it that there is a crisis brewing!

Back to the article:

Flowers’ office did not return calls for comment.

Separately, Waxman and Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., have called for an investigation into whether Halliburton and its subsidiary received favored treatment in the awarding of the contract.

Far be it from me to allow the writer of this article to hold these two up as heroes.

This call for an investigation, as well as the loudmouth criticisms by these two democrats, are nothing more than a dog and pony show. It's window-dressing from a pair of socialist Democrats, who are completely on board with the plan. Don't be fooled! These two are controlled opposition.

There will be no investigation. Even if there were one, it would be nothing more than a whitewash. Or, better stated, "hogwash!"

Vice President Dick Cheney was Halliburton’s chief executive for five years before he resigned in August 2000 to be George W. Bush’s running mate. Halliburton and the Army Corps have both repeatedly denied any favoritism stemming from Cheney’s former role in the company.

The contract was awarded to Halliburton’s Kellogg Brown & Root subsidiary March 8 and disclosed publicly March 24. Kellogg Brown & Root was selected because, under a separate Army logistics contract, it already had developed contingency plans for repairing and operating Iraq’s oil infrastructure, Flowers said in the letter. (Emphasis mine)

How convenient that the Halliburton subsidiary had already drawn up the plan for rebuilding Iraq's oil infrastructure! That, of course, in light of the fact that we a secret document of Bush and company, that lays out the entire agenda for the war with Iraq, Syria and other countries. You can read it for yourself. It is called, Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces, and Resources for a New Century. This document is in .pdf format, so you will need Acrobat Reader, if you don't already have it.

Among other things, the report establishes missions for U.S. forces which include:

Defending the American homeland

Fighting and decisively winning multiple, simultaneous theatre wars

Performing the 'constabulary' duties associated with shaping the security environment in critical regions

Transforming U.S. forces to exploit the 'revolution in military affairs'


These points — including the second one — were taken directly from their report, which was written in 2000, before George W. Bush became president.

This is the same report that the Sunday Herald, a newspaper in the United Kingdom called a "secret blueprint for U.S. global domination." You can read their comments about the report here.

I am reminded of the statement of Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., one of their spooks at the Council on Foreign Relations. In the July/August 1993 edition of Foreign Affairs, he said,

"In defense of the World Order, U.S. Soldiers would have to kill and die... We are not going to achieve a new world order, without paying for it in blood, as well as in words and money."

The blood won't be theirs. It will be your sons' and daughters'. The money won't be their's. It will be the money of the already over-burdened American taxpayer. The words and the brainwashing will be theirs.

The war on terror was planned before Bush was elected president. September 11th was the orchestrated springboard for it, and will ultimately lead to world war three.

Don't think so? Read the above linked report. It also outlines plans to "democratize" China and Russia. They will be brought into the war, if the plan is brought into fruition. And unfortunately, it seems to be humming right along.

Continuing with the article:

The military wanted firefighters and disaster specialists in Kuwait “in advance of possibly imminent hostilities,’’ Flowers said. “Under the circumstances, no other contractor could satisfy mission requirements in the time available.’’

No other contractor had the advance knowledge that such a "mission requirement" would exist. Therefore, how could another contractor be better prepared to meet the needs than those who have foreknowledge of the planning of the events?

In addition to fighting oil and gas well fires, the contract specifies that KBR would respond to oil spills and provide life-support facilities and services to contractors and government employees on the project, among other tasks.

Although the full contract remains classified,

Now, hold it right there! Let me interrupt.

Why do you suppose the full contract remains classified? What's with all of the secrecy here? The war in Iraq is supposedly over. What possible national secrets are going to be violated by releasing the details of this contract?

Folks, do you see what's wrong with this picture? This is a SEVEN BILLION (that's $7,000,000,000) government contract and we are not being allowed to know where this money is going! And no one appears to be outraged about this except for me and a few democrats who are putting on a look-good show.

Where are all of the phonies like Limbaugh who were such harsh critics of Clinton when he did this type of stuff? They cannot sing enough praises for Bush.

I going to venture a guess about the reasoning behind the secrecy. I don't know if I'm close here, but I'll ask the question that's running through my mind right now: Could it be that this contract also includes provisions for rebuilding the other countries that the administration and their handlers plan on attacking next? Or are there going to be additional contracts of around $7 billion for each country?

If the latter is true, then from whence is the money going to come? Because we already have a national debt of $6.4 trillion (that's $6,460,828,617,061.12 as of April 10th to be exact). And it's growing fast! And the Democrats are the ones who get blamed for spending.

Folks, I've said it before, and I'll keep saying it: There is no difference between the Democrats and the Republicans! They are two heads of the same beast. Both play their fair role in the demise of this once-great nation.

...Flowers said in his letter that KBR could earn a profit of as much as 7 percent greater than the costs reimbursed by the army — a profit of $490 million, if the contract ran to its maximum.

And you can count on the fact that it will.

In disclosing the $7 billion “ceiling cost,’’ Flowers stated: “The actual value of the contract will depend on the cost of the orders placed under it. It is impossible to predict how much damage there will be and what work will be required in the near term.’’ The figure was derived from “an estimate of worst-case damage,’’ he said.

Flowers stressed that the contract was strictly for emergency oil-field services.

How do we know what the contract is for, when most of it is classified? So we're supposed to take this Lt. Gen. Robert Flowers' word for it?

“There will be ample opportunity for competition of the overall requirements to support the restoration of Iraq’s oil infrastructure,’’ he added.

More than two weeks before the war began, Kellogg Brown & Root sent to Kuwait teams of firefighters from Houston-based Boots & Coots International Well Control Inc. That company has a strategic alliance with Halliburton, giving it the inside track on such work when Kellogg Brown & Root is the prime contractor.

I wonder how many shares of Boots & Coots that Bush and Cheney own.

Also under scrutiny is the bidding process for the civilian contracts being issued by the Agency for International Development for the reconstruction of Iraq’s infrastructure. It, too, was done in secret during the run-up to war, and the agency invited only American companies with security clearances and a track record of working with the AID to bid on eight contracts that total $1.7 billion.

On Thursday, three senators introduced a bill that would require the AID and other federal agencies to publicly justify any closed bidding process for Iraqi reconstruction work.

Count on the fact that this bill will go nowhere!

“The pattern of closed-door bargaining for massive contracts is a distinct departure from the way that government contracts have traditionally been awarded,’’ said Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., who sponsored the bill with Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y.

Added Clinton: “It would be unfortunate if, in our effort to set an example of open government and democratic principles abroad, we undermined those principles here at home.’’

How disingenuous!

Hillary Clinton talking about principles? Hillary Clinton talking about setting an example? I can think of at least a dozen similar conflicts-of-interest that her and her husband, President Wandering Weenie, were engaged in, at taxpayers' expense. And those are just the ones about which we know.

Hey, Hillary, save your self-righteous, hypocritical baloney for someone who believes it!

AID Administrator Andrew Natsios and other agency officials have said they resorted to the streamlined, classified bidding process because of national security and time constraints.

Under the agency’s normal “full and open’’ competitive bidding process, it can take up to six months to award a contract. The expedited process takes as little as two months.

Of course, since the war was planned well over two years ago, a couple of months is an easy period with which to deal.

Conflicts of interest are fine if the president is doing so at a time of war. Never mind the fact that this war was planned before he ever took office. Never mind the fact, that several thousand people were murdered in New York city on September 11, 1991 as a pretense for the war.

I hope the spooks in the Bush administration and their handlers all enjoy their riches, while living on this earth.

But to all of them, I would like to quote a passage of scripture from Isaiah 14:9 which I believe is directed at such diabolical individuals:

"Hell from beneath is moved for thee to meet thee at thy coming."

It is a homecoming that will be well earned by George, and his handlers.

By Darren Weeks

They say that truth is the first casualty of war.

As bad as the Hussein regime has been described by the controlled media, the fact remains that Saddam has done many good things, during his tenure, for the people of Iraq. Since the American anti-free press won't tell you about them, I guess it's up to me to clue you in.

When Saddam Hussein came to power, most Iraqis were completely illiterate. He was responsible for implementing a rather elaborate education system that required both boys and girls, men and women, to learn how to read and write.

Since the tradition in the Arab world had always been that women should be nurturers and should stay at home, Hussein's plan met with no small amount of opposition.

Knowing that education of the population was an important step in his goal to build a powerful Iraqi enconomy, Saddam instituted a law: In order for anyone to obtain a loan, or any kind of assistance, they must know how to read and write. Also, men who refused to allow their daughters to go to school, would be jailed, or have their electricity turned off. Additionally, fines were instituted for missed classes.

The result was the in a short period of time, illiteracy in Iraq was nearly completely stamped out.

So impressive was his achievement, that Saddam Hussein — that "diabolical dictator," that "mad butcher of Baghdad" — received an award from the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Culteral Organization (UNESCO) for Iraq's literacy program. Does this sound like the monster that the media describes?

If Hussein was really the hellhound that he has been portrayed as, then why would he take the time and effort to educate the Iraqi populace?

History is repleat with examples of tyrannical governments. One of the first steps in establishing a tyrannical form of government is to dumb down the population. A dumbed down population is much easier to manipulate and control.

Hence, it should come as no surprise, that as the United States moves closer into the clutches of a socialists' tyranny, our school systems are failing to teach the basics of academics.

Education is vital in maintaining freedom.

In fact, Samuel Adams understood this when he said, "If virtue and knowledge are diffused among the people, they will never be enslaved. This will be their great security."

Perhaps, Dr. Benjamin Rush in 1776, put it best: "Freedom can exist only in the society of knowledge. Without learning, men are incapable of knowing their rights."

Now, lest you get the wrong idea, I'm not trying to paint the now former dictator as a perfect man. I do not believe that there are any such men — especially in power.

I do believe that, based upon what I've read of the history of Iraq and of Hussein himself, that Saddam might very well have been the best leader the Iraqi people have ever known.

Not only did he see to it that they were educated, but he had little tolerance for corruption within his own cabinet. He's been known to assassinate members of his government for taking bribes.

Extreme, yes. But very effective!

I sometimes wonder what our country would be like, if we dealt with traitors in America as severely. I suspect most of the present government leaders wouldn't be around today. I guarantee we wouldn't have a $6.4 trillion national debt, either.

Often Hussein, a master of disguise from his days working underground for the Baathis party, would appear in public as an ordinary person. Sometimes, he would be a beggar. He did this, so that he could get honest feedback from the average citizen. He would listen to what the people were saying and attempt to implement policies, based upon the regular folks' views.

Saddam Hussein also gave other rights to women in Iraq. Under his leadership, for the first time in the country's history, sufferage was extended to women.

This is information that is lost in todays headlines.

Some would argue with me about Hussein, citing the invasion of Kuwait as an example of a madman's desire to take over his neighbors, and perhaps, the world. The facts, as I understand them, are much different.

It seems, in fact, that Saddam had little choice but to invade Kuwait. For they were apparently destroying the Iraqi economy.

After the Iran-Iraq war, Iraq's economy was in shambles. It was understood by the Arab nations, that Iraq had fought the war on behalf of all the Arab states. It was also understood that the other Arab states would share in the cost of the war.

Kuwait kept demanding payment on the war debt that Iraq had incurred during their war with Iran. Saddam is said to have repeatedly attempted to negotiate with the Kuwaiti leaders, but they kept demanding payment.

Adding to the tension, was the age-old border dispute that Iraq had with the country of Kuwait.

For reasons that are far too complicated to go into right now, the borders between Iraq and Kuwait were never really clearly defined when the countries were established. The land that had become Kuwait, had been promised to Iraq at the time that Iraq was established by the British government.

For whatever reason, the promise wasn't kept. But to the Iraqis, thoughout the history of both countries, the promise was never forgotten.

In 1991, as Iraq was attempting to recover from the war which devasted their economy, Kuwait kept inching their border further and further north toward Iraq's valuable oil fields. It is said that they even began taking over them and pumping the oil from them.

Again, negotiations were attempted by Saddam, but were refused by the Kuwaitis.

Finally, came the straw which broke the desert camel's back.

Kuwait began greatly exceeding the designated amount of oil set by OPEC, to control the price of oil. This cut largely into Iraq's already bleak economy. In fact, it took about one-third of the money out of their economy.

Saddam interpreted the act of Kuwait as an act of aggression, that was encouraged by the United States and Israel. Therefore, after all other efforts at diplomacy had failed, he finally ordered his troops in.

King Hussein of Jordon acted as a negotiator between the Iraqis and the Kuwaitis and was confident that a peaceful resolution could be worked out between the two countries.

That is, until George Bush, the 41st president of the United States, condemned the action of Saddam, making it impossible for him to pull out of Kuwait, without the appearance of being bullied.

Why am I telling you all of this?

It is because I believe that knowing a little bit of the history of the man that has been so villified might help to open your mind to the fact that there are always two sides to every story.

We, in the U.S.A., only hear the side that the controlled media tells. And they — just like our government — heavily support Israel. They do not tell the full truth. Often, they don't tell any of the truth.

If you would like to read another side of the Iraq story, Nita Renfrew has written an excellent biography (pdf format) of Saddam Hussein. She lived in Iraq and has done extensive research into the history of the country, and the life of its now former leader.

Yes, the first casualty of war is the truth. And the truth is, there has been a war on for global conquest for ages — long before September 11th and the war on terror.

And it's not just the Iraqi people whose freedoms are being lost. Your freedoms hang in the balance, too.

As Jesus said, in John 8:32, "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."

It's time to start caring about the truth. And then, to help spread the word.

By Darren Weeks

The pro-Israeli propaganda machine has been working overtime today in an attempt to convince the American people that the people of Iraq are happy that their government has been overthrown.

There are some points to consider.

While I don't doubt that there are a few people who disliked the Baathi government — every government has their enemies — I wonder just how many of the people shown by the Jewish press (American media) really are Iraqis that are celebrating and how many of these are actors. Keep in mind that this is a tool that they have used before, as we have seen newspaper articles where they have used the same actors to represent both the Israeli and the Palestinian sides.

Even if all of the stories and videos that the American propagandists are showing are legit, you have to keep in mind that the vast majority of the Iraqi people are not represented. Most of the Iraqi people are not out in the streets celebrating. The vast majority, who haven't yet been killed or injured by the American military strikes, are hiding at home. Most of these people, I would guess, are scared to death at what is going to happen next to their country and to them.

If any of them are really happy, it is probably because they believe that the suffering, imposed by the U.S. and the U.N. through 12 long years of sanctions, might finally be at an end.

Still, consider their sober reality:

The largest ally of their greatest enemy has now invaded and overthown their government.

Over the years, Israel has repeatedly entered and invaded the Palestinian territory and bulldozed their homes. Now, through the United States, Israel is in control.

As one Arab web site put it:

The US, the world's super power, defeats the Third World country of Iraq after pounding it for 12 years through sanctions. Casualties: less than 100 soldiers for US and about 1.5 million Iraqis. Consequences: Total Israeli hegemony over the Middle East, the oil wells are secure, the military industry will be thriving for decades, and the stock markets are ready to take off.

It is a dark day for the Arab world. They haven't been liberated. The repression has just begun.

By Darren Weeks

I respect Benjamin Franklin as a great orator, and for his alledged role in many scientific discoveries and insights with respect to the foundation of our country. All of that being said, even the greatest among us have their faults.

I attribute his greatest to being credited (or blamed) for giving us the ludicrous practice of Daylight Saving Time.

I looked at the clock this evening and discovered that I still had about an hour to go to the mall before it closed.

After getting into my truck, I glanced at the clock, and the realization suddenly sank in: It was, indeed, closing time. All of the clocks at my house were wrong. Apparently no one had set them forward. I am, hence, a victim of this stupid practice that has been thrust upon us, called Daylight Saving Time.

Can somebody please e-mail me, and explain to me why we still engage in this ridiculous ritual?

How many more victims, throughout the years, have been caused grief or general inconvenience by this twice-annual asinine action? As if some of us don't have a hard enough time keeping track of time, and being on time, the "powers that be" have to monkey with our clocks, and screw with our routines twice every year.

And what are the benefits of this practice — other than to see who is on the ball, and who isn't paying attention? And what about the significant technical problems associated with the time change that those of us who work in technological fields have to deal?

Does it really save any daylight? Of course not! There are still as many hours in the day, as there were when 1:00 was actually 1:00. Now that we refer to our old friend 1:00 by a different name — that is, 2:00 — supposedly, we have more daylight in our lives. I cannot believe any rationally thinking person could buy this.

The real reason that we are given for this idiotic, ill-conceived, impractical, and imprudent idea, is that it saves energy. I don't believe it.

And even if it did save a little energy — and it would have to only be a little — do we really need to save energy that badly?

Other than in California — where the state government has really screwed up the power distribution systems — I don't believe that we have a shortage of electricity in these United States of America.

Perhaps countries like Cuba could benefit from shifting their time to and fro, to make the days more productive. After all, Cuba is a country, I am told, that has a fish shortage! There is only one way that you can have a fish shortage in a country that is surrounded by fish. And that can be explained in one word: Communism.

America is not a communist state. (Well, not entirely yet, anyway.) We still have enough freedoms here to avoid the kinds of shortages that other nations have to endure. Therefore, we have no need to confuse the productivity of the country by screwing with people's brains twice a year.

My message is clear: Let's get rid of this age-old antic — this mind-blowing manuever of madness — and get on with our every day lives.

America doesn't need a Daylight Saving Time.

America just needs to know what time it actually is, and to know what time they must be at work. And to know that they have the freedom and incentive to get out of bed and show up there to contribute. That is what makes America great.