| Alex welcomes Austin police chief Art Acevedo to the studio and also talks with Constitution Party presidential nominee Chuck Baldwin. |
Alex Jones show - Art Acevedo and Chuck Baldwin part 1. Alex Jones show - Chuck Baldwin pt 2.
Guest Blogged by Alan Breslauer of HotPotatoMash and Jason Leopold of The Public Record...
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's appearance Monday at a West Los Angeles college to discuss her recently published book was marred by dozens of protesters and several angry outbursts by audience members who demanded Pelosi immediately authorize a House committee to hold impeachment hearings against George W. Bush.
The Speaker made it clear she would not support any effort to hold impeachment hearings against George W. Bush Bush saying that he "will be gone in a hundred days."
Halfway through her discussion at The American University of Judaism, where more than 300 people paid $30 each to hear Pelosi speak about her upbringing and her family's impact on her political career as detailed in her book Know Your Power: A Message to America’s Daughters, the topic shifted to Congress's historically low approval rating and how it reflected on Pelosi’s tenure as Speaker.
An outbreak of protest ensued leading to one protester being escorted out of the event by the Secret Service. Later, blogger Alan Breslauer was similarly removed by Secret Service agents, after attempting to ask a question of the House Speaker during her book signing session. Some of those protests can be seen in the video at right.
American University of Judaism's Rabbi Robert Wexler, who led the 75-minute interview, asked Pelosi to analyze a recent Rasmussen poll that found nine percent of individuals polled believed Congress was doing a good job, far lower than Bush's overall approval rating.
Pelosi responded by defending her performance and the performance of her Democratic colleagues in Congress.
"I preside over the greatest collection of integrity and idealism," Pelosi said. Prior to her appearance in West Los Angeles Monday evening, CNN’s Larry King interviewed Pelosi. She told King she was willing to drop her staunch opposition to offshore drilling and would likely allow the House to vote on the issue.
She said, in her opinion, the reason behind Congress’s low approval rating was largely due to the fact that Democrats could not muster up the votes to end the Iraq war, which the Democratic Speaker from San Francisco said she could not do much about because of the Democrats’ razor-thin majority in both Houses.
Wexler, however, continued to press Pelosi to elaborate on her response given that the Rasmussen poll suggested that a wide-range of issues beyond the Iraq war was responsible for Congress’s single-digit approval. Pelosi, visibly flustered, said she was well aware that “much more work needs to be done.”...
Aimee Allen on Alex Jones Show 2
As the sun begins to set on the tyrannical Bush/Cheney Administration, a “culprit” for the anthrax attacks has been dropped on us. The government has produced the dead body of “mad scientist” Bruce Ivins, the way a smiling cat produces a mouse carcass. This new lone assassin story holds together quite well: as long as you look only at it, and not at any of the other grisly details about US government involvement in anthrax.
The biggest hole in the current news story is that we all are expected now to reverse seven years of thinking, and suddenly believe that the anthrax attacks had no connection to 9/11. They were the work of an American insider, a psycho killer inside the US Army’s Fort Detrick, the Maryland headquarters of tax-payer funded chemical warfare.
With all the blame on Ivins, the official story has contradicted itself.
For example, look at this:
Above is the letter that was sent to Senator Tom Daschle. Would a crazy mad scientist NOT tied to the 9/11 attacks send his anthrax letters out right after 9/11, with “09-11-01” on top, and end the cover note with “Allah is Great”? Would he be willing to contribute to the public terror and build up the effect of 9/11, resulting in the advancement of the neo-con agenda? And here’s the stickler: Would he drive seven hours to Princeton, NJ to mail the letters, because he’s obsessed with a Catholic sorority there, but at the SAME time he’s sane enough to use the 9/11 attacks as a cover story? One that keeps him safe for seven years?
Something doesn’t add up.
Remember Jerome Hauer? We New Yorkers remember him well as the guy whose idea it was to spray carcinogenic insecticides, at eye level, from small pick up trucks, in residential city neighborhoods, to combat the almost nonexistent threat of “West Nile Virus” back in the Giuliani days. He was a NYC Government bio-terrorism expert who happened to be doing a bio-terrorism drill called “Tripod II” inside the World Trade Center on the morning of 9/11. It turns out Hauer is old friends with Steven Hatfill, the other anthrax suspect. It turns out, they both lectured at the Council on Foreign Relations together not too many years ago on the topic of “Building a ‘BioBomb’: Terrorist Challenge.” Yep, Hatfill, who commissioned a report from the CIA on how to attack people using anthrax in the mail, back when he worked at Ft. Detrick.
According to a San Jose newspaper, Jerome Hauer told the White House to go on Cipro on the evening of 9/11/01. They did. (On the phone with me, he denied telling the White House that, for what it’s worth.)
Shortly thereafter, Hauer’s next job was at the National Institute of Health, where he was tasked with, guess what? Investigating the anthrax attacks. And who did he point the finger to? Not Ivins, not Hatfill, not any of the gang at Ft. Detrick, or S.A.I.C., Hatfill and Hauer’s old employer, the military contractor. No, Hauer blamed Al Qaeda and Bin Laden. Another Democrat reading from the neo-con hymnal.
(In the same way, when Dan Rather looked at the collapse of the towers on 9/11 and on live TV said it looked just like one of those controlled demolitions, Hauer happened to be right there alongside Rather, saying, nope, it’s clear to me right now that it was jet fuel that dropped those structures. He knew more than one page of the hymnal.)
When you hear the media go on and on about Bruce Ivins’ obsession with sorority girls, or his insanity, take it with a grain of salt. A man’s reputation is fragile and it’s the first thing attacked in a situation like this.
For example, take Dr. Graham. He was a 9/11 truth researcher who died two years ago in Louisiana. Dr. Graham was a Louisiana community activist, a Vietnam veteran, an evangelical, an inventor, and a dentist who met two of the 9/11 hijackers in his hometown of Shreveport ten months before 9/11. He warned the FBI that he found the two young Saudis suspicious. But he was verbally abused and threatened by FBI. When 9/11 happened, these same two young Saudis were called Bin Laden’s right hand men. That’s interesting because the same two were protected by various agencies of the Federal government in multiple instances, in various cities across the USA.
In 2004, on the verge of publishing a book about his experiences with the FBI and the 9/11 terrorists, Dr. Graham was poisoned.
Here’s where the Graham story becomes a lot like the Ivins story. Graham was taken to the hospital and the FBI showed up in the ER at the same time. The FBI intimidated doctors, told them he was crazy. The cardiac surgeon abandoned Graham after that. The FBI implied Graham was suicidal to the Shreveport media. Graham died a slow death a year and a half later from the poisoning. The local media there have been reticent to cover this story, and effectively consented to let the FBI write it for them. But it’s the FBI who should be indicted for murder.
Recently, anthrax suspect Steven Hatfill was paid $6 million of your taxpayer dollars. He didn’t like being called a “person of interest” in the anthrax investigation and he sued the Department of Justice. Wow, $6 million. I guess it pays to be friends with people like Jerome Hauer and the Council on Foreign Relations. And yet I’m still waiting for answers regarding so much about Hatfill. I wish I had all the time in the world to fully research his alleged ties to far-right fascist groups in South Africa (who used anthrax). And why did the Washington Post Magazine report that a glove box for handling toxic chemicals was found concealed at the bottom of a pond on Hatfill’s property? The $6 million doesn’t exonerate him in my eyes. It sounds like someone pulling favors.
The same Department of Justice that paid him hasn’t responded to my formal request that the Inspector General at Justice look into FBI involvement in the death of Dr. Graham. This might seem unreasonable but they themselves promised a response. They are now five months late. I had called them from Shreveport after I had confronted the local FBI. I felt the walls closing in. The FBI didn’t deny that they had told the local media the Graham was crazy. They stuck to their story and tried to get me to believe it. But they couldn’t provide evidence. There is none. Graham was a good man and his suspicions were right on. The FBI agent I talked to had murder and cover-up just pouring out of his body-language, his nervous twitches, and the way he expelled me and another reporter from their offices.
In the same way, we are being handed an official story about Bruce Ivins. But details are left out. Like why did the FBI have to offer Ivin’s son $2.5 million and the “sportscar of your choice” to say certain things about his dad? If Ivins was guilty, then why the need to fabricate evidence? An offer of $2.5 million sounds heavy handed, like you’re desperate to find a fall guy, dead or alive. Preferably dead, patsies are so much more agreeable that way.
Let’s go back to Jerry Hauer. This was a guy who came up a lot at the Citizens Grand Jury convened by citizen activists in the well-organized 9/11 truth community. When I was researching my story on the Spitzer-Silverstein connection for New York Megaphone, I tracked down Hauer’s home phone number and called him on Labor Day, last fall. My timing was good, because I think he was a little drunk. He said things slightly slurred, and was at times a bit too honest. It was all a joke to him. On the audio file you can hear people laughing in the background.
We discussed the San Diego Citizens Grand Jury Indictment, which he dismissed with insults, but couldn’t say why.
He confirmed that he worked with Hatfill at SAIC. Then, I asked if Hatfill was innocent of involvement in the anthrax attacks. He was less than direct:
HICKS: A lot of people are wondering you know, where these anthrax attacks came from.
HAUER: I have uh…NO idea.
HICKS: Do you think that Hatfill is innocent?
HAUER: I…I…think that the FBI…should not have s…said anything about Hatfield until they knew more. I do not think Steve Hatfield is a murderer. I think Steve Hatfield is very passionate but I don’t think he’s a murderer. I don’t believe he did it.
HICKS: Uhhhh. That seems to be not the most clear, specific response in the world. I’m wondering if you’re saying that Hatfill…Can you say conclusively that Hatfill was not involved in the anthrax attacks? Is that what you’re saying?
HAUER: I’m not going to get into those details.
HICKS: So you’re leaving some room for ambiguity?
HAUER: No, I’m not. I’m not going to get into those details.
HICKS: Why not?
HAUER: I just don’t want to comment on it.
I just listened to the whole mp3 again for the first time in a while. I remember the night I made the interview. And then, using 1/8 inch audio cables, I turned my phone recording tape player into something that could talk to a Mac. Using some mp3-studio shareware I downloaded, I made this mp3. I was excited because I sort of knew that someday, the US Government and the FBI would throw up a sloppy non-answer for the anthrax attacks. And on that day, I knew that this interview would be especially relevant. I felt at the time I had contributed something to advancing the real story on anthrax.
In this audio file, notice how Jerry Hauer sort of acknowledges that the FBI is mishandling the case, and yet he still refers he to them as the place to go for answers. That’s called misprision of a felony, when you know that someone is committing a crime, like covering up the five anthrax murders. But you don’t do anything about it.
Maybe because you were involved.
Audio - Hicks and Hauer:
http://www.voxpopnet.net/podcasts/hauer.mp3
http://www.911blogger.com/node/17040
Labels: and Other 9/11 Legends, Sander Hicks: The “Mad Scientist” Ivins
posted by Whisleblower | 03:06:00 
You'll be able to listen online at www.PeterBCollins.com if his show is not aired in your town. And you may call in with questions and comments for Arnebeck or myself at 888-5-PeterB (or post them here, and I'll try to ask them). Hope you'll tune in!
Today Attorney Cliff Arnebeck, who last week filed papers seeking discovery and depositions from Karl Rove and others for election manipulation, wrote to Attorney General Mukasey asking for protection for GOP IT guru Michael
Connell and his wife Heather. Mr. Arnebeck stated that he had received credible
confidential information from various sources indicating that Rove and his henchmen
threatened Mr. and Mrs. Connell. In short, Rove et al, either directly or
indirectly, demanded that Connell take the fall for the election manipulation
or the Justice Department would target Mrs. Connell for some lobby related
money laundering.
Arnebeck, an officer of the federal court, took these threats seriously. First he reported this to the federal judge handling the case, the Ohio Attorney General and the United States Attorney in Columbus.
Next he wrote to Attorney General Michael Mukasey insisting on protection for the
Connells.
The entire letter is set out below and more information is on The BRAD BLOG and on ePluribusMedia.
In a short interview with VR, Mr. Arnebeck stated that Rove et al “had just made things a lot worse for themselves. It is a federal crime to threaten a witness – they are engaging in obstruction of
justice, blackmail, suborning perjury, and intimidation. These charges
alone could land them in the penitentiary for a very long time.”
The complete, short email, sent from Arnebeck to AG Mukasey, follows in full below...
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 10:51 AM
To: XXXXX
Subject: Report of Rove threats against witness Michael Connell
Dear Attorney General Mukasey:
We have been confidentially informed by a source we believe to be credible that Karl Rove has threatened Michael Connell, a principal witness we have identified in our King Lincoln case in federal court in Columbus, Ohio, that if
he does not agree to "take the fall" for election fraud in Ohio, his
wife Heather will be prosecuted for supposed lobby law violations.This appears
to be in response to our designation of Rove as the principal perpetrator in
the Ohio Corrupt Practices Act/RICO claim with respect to which we issued
document hold notices last Thursday to you and to the US Chamber of Commerce
Institute for Legal Reform. See: http://www.bradblog.com/?p=6189
and http://www.archive.org/d...tionFraudInOhioCourtCase.
I have informed court chambers and am in the process of informing the Ohio Attorney General's and US Attorney's offices in Columbus for the purpose, among other things, of seeking protection for Mr. Connell and his family from this reported
attempt to intimidate a witness.
Concurrently herewith, I am informing Mr. Conyers and Mr. Kucinich in connection with their Congressional oversight responsibilities related to these matters.
Because of the serious engagement in this matter that began in 2000 of the Ohio Statehouse Press Corps, 60 Minutes, the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, C-Span and Jim VandeHei, and the public's right to know of gross attempts to
subvert the rule of law, I am forwarding this information to them, as well.
Cliff Arnebeck, Attorney
###-###-####
Cell ###-###-####
cc: Robert Fitrakis, Esq.
Henry Eckhart, Esq
On July 17, VR sat down with the two Ohio attorneys who have filed to take targeted depositions of Karl Rove and others to expose their strategy of election fraud. The ten minute interview is a real eye opener because they talk about how they plan to
bring back the rule of law to this country and hold those accountable who have undermined
it over the past eight years. And they name names familiar to everyone—Jack Abramoff,
Bob Ney, Ken Blackwell, Grover Norquist, Michael Connell and others. This is a must see
video so watch it here.
VR was present at the Ohio press conference yesterday and filmed it. We will be posting an edited clip for YouTube shortly but for all those who want to see it unedited, you can watch it here in eight segments for a total of one hour and two minutes.
We also have this available in high resolution for members of the press upon request.
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7
Part 8
Yesterday, Ohio Attorney Cliff Arnebeck launched a new legal strategy to expose a national strategy of election manipulation directed by Karl Rove. The implications are stunning. Arnebeck has asked the
Ohio Federal Court to allow for targeted under oath depositions of key
individuals including Rove, Bush IT guru Michael Connell, Jack Abramoff, Ken
Blackwell and others. This will be the first opportunity ever to place
these individuals under oath.
Arnebeck indicated that he has amassed a great deal of information from various sources including whistleblowers implicating Rove. He wrote in yesterday’s court filing that the “suspected lead
perpetrator of this conspiracy against the civil rights of the plaintiffs and
against the rule of law in the United States is Karl Rove…. Rove’s politicization
of the Justice Department is currently being investigation by the US
House Judiciary Committee.”
See pdf.
Arnebeck also notified both Attorney General Mukasey and the Chamber of Commerce that he intends to “assert an Ohio Corrupt Practices Act/RICO claim against Mr. Karl Rove and others based upon their activities
beginning in 2000 to illegally use corporate treasury money and government
power to establish single faction dominance in the United States, military
dominance in the world and generally undermine the rule of law as it had
developed over the course of the past century.”
See pdf 2 and
Word doc.
VR was at the press conference and extensive coverage is here on our Election Protection Strike Force and on THE Brad Blog.
Raw Story has also covered this with new details on the possible manipulation of the 2002 Senate Max Cleland Senate race.
VR will have a complete video of the press conference up shortly.
Today, Ohio attorney Cliff Arnebeck, lead attorney in the lawsuit over the 2004 Ohio election contest, issued the following press release.
“Counsel for plaintiffs in the federal King Lincoln Bronzeville v. Blackwell case will hold a press conference at 11 AM Thursday July 17, 2008 in the Mezzanine conference room of LeVeque Tower.
We are filing to lift the stay in the case in order to proceed with targeted discovery in order to help protect the integrity of the 2008 election. We also will be providing copies of document hold notices
to the US Chamber Institute for Legal Reform and the US Justice Department for
Karl Rove Emails from the White House.
Our new data security expert in the case, Stephen Spoonamore, one of the leading authorities on data security in the world, is planning to attend the conference and will provide some of his perspectives in this matter.
Representatives from one of our plaintiffs, League of Young Voters, will also be attending.
We look forward to seeing you there tomorrow.
Cliff Arnebeck, Attorney for the Plaintiffs”
Velvet Revolution will be covering the press conference and will have video shortly. Stay tuned for some very important information regarding the suit.
Could The Anthrax Mailings Be Military-Industrial Espionage?
On October 1, 2001-approximately two weeks prior to the first publicly announced anthrax mailing-FBI officials received an urgent warning from this author. Investigators were directed to consider certain pharmaceutical and/or military contractors as suspects in anthrax-related psychological operations (PSYOPs) and bio-terror-linked sabotage.
Near the time of this writing, some of my critical pronouncements have appeared in national news reports. On November 26, 2001, concerns regarding the Bayer Corporation's Cipro were featured by the Washington Times.(1) On December 2 and 3, 2001, the New York Times focused on U.S. military biological weapons contractors as the source of the anthrax-mailings.(2,3) This report relays additional evidence that these criminal offenses, classically called serial murders by the FBI, are best explained by a relatively new treasonous form of military-industrial sabotage. This conclusion is supported by the public access reports cited herein, and issued by scientific and military officials alike, as presented by the mainstream media. Amazingly, despite generally perceived limitations on freedom of the press, enough truths are still told today to allow determined investigators and journalists to piece little known facts together to reflect broad, sociopolitical criminal realities. The following report provides important background on the suspects implicated in the anthrax mailings. As with every official FBI investigation of suspects in serial slayings, a review of the developmental histories of chief suspects was conducted while considering military-industrial espionage as a possible motive for the crime of sending anthrax through the mail. From this knowledge, chief suspects were identified, and a determination of the sole source of the mailed anthrax was made. The evidence strongly suggests a conspiracy to commit sabotage and treason against America involving anthrax developers at the Battelle Memorial Institute, and agents within the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and/or national security system. more at: battelle14.htm
FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
