living off the grid Home 
Home Living off the grid 
next 
Home Living off the grid next 
 This thing really works!  |
Above are two very good web tools of which I can only say use um! Or loose um!, Or forever hold your peace,
Coulda! wouldua shouldua!
Remember:
THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES WON'T
DEFEND IT SELF. THAT IS THE JOB, THE RIGHT,THE
DUTY OF EVERY CITIZEN!
Orcas Island http://hometown.aol.com/peggysrv/index.html ©2004
|
 |
It took two ferry rides to get to Orcas Island in the San Juans, where we drove up to
Mt.Constitution, the highest point in this island chain at 2,409 feet. There's no way to
describe the beauty of this view - to say stunning is a gross understatement.
|
The Old Man, the Mountain and the Sea
Naturalist Has Big Plan for Sailboat
By Blaine Harden ©2004
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, April 28, 2004; Page A01
ORCAS ISLAND, Wash. -- At 85, App Applegate keeps pushing the limits of living
off the grid.
Out here in Puget Sound, on the upper west side of the American dream, he lives
n a shack without running water, listens to National Public Radio on a hand-crank
radio and avoids outhouses as ecologically incorrect. He prefers a shovel and an
open field.
Barely 5 feet tall, Applegate is a Hobbit-size pioneer among the counterculture cadre
that has long sought soggy exile in the far corners of the Pacific Northwest. But Orcas
Island, which Seattle millionaires are busily refurbishing as the Martha's Vineyard of
the West, is not nearly far out enough for Applegate. So, for the past 15 years, he has
been building an escape module.
It's a whopper: An 80-foot, 50-ton, three-masted sailboat. Local sailors say the wooden
barkentine is nearly finished, solid and seaworthy, if a bit rough around the gunnels.
Applegate built it by hand -- outdoors, often in miserably dank weather -- and he paid
for the whole thing with Social Security checks. He plans to sail east around the world
to dock in Cienfuegos Bay, Cuba. He's a fervent admirer of Fidel Castro.
There is a logistical kink. The boat sits where it was built: on the side of a mountain
beneath towering Douglas firs, 400 feet above sea level, six miles from a suitable
boat launch. A narrow dirt road -- steep, potholed and snaggled with switchbacks --
lies between Applegate's boat and its departure for his beloved "Coo-bah."
"We will set sail in April," he said. "I am not yet sure which April."
Before explaining how Applegate -- a retired physics professor and self-described
atheist, socialist and radical -- intends to get himself and his boat off the mountain,
it makes sense to examine why he went up there in the first place.
"I came to Orcas to sit down and read, to enjoy the ferns and moss and to escape
the contemptibility of our politicians," he said.
In this respect, Applegate is not all that far off the demographic grid, as it exists in
the Pacific Northwest.
The region is more liberal, more literate and much less religious than the country as
a whole. Washington and Oregon lead the states in the percentage of adults who
report no religious identification -- 25 percent here, compared with 14 percent
nationally.
There is a secular orthodoxy here, and it believes in wild salmon, clean rivers and
urban growth management. Twenty-eight percent of the population voted for
George W. Bush in 2000, compared with 45 percent nationally. Politicians in Portland
and Seattle have welcomed gay marriage. Heterosexual marriage, meanwhile, takes
its lumps. The Northwest has a higher divorce rate than any other region of the country.
Politically correct Northwest residents drink Wild Salmon Organic Pale Ale and build
houses out of wood that is certified by a third party to have been cut from sustainable
forests. When Washington state residents die, they are 12 times as likely as
Alabamans to be cremated rather than buried. Eco-aware residents, apparently,
don't want to contribute to cemetery sprawl.
The name of Applegate's boat is the Aproximada. It's Spanish for "approximate,"
and the word captures Applegate's design and construction philosophy. It also
describes his departure schedule and his technique for recruiting sailors who might
want to go with him to Cuba.
The Aproximada has eight berths and will need a crew of at least five. So far, there
is only one sure bet.
She is Rivkah Sweedler, 58, a woodcarver and longtime exile from what she calls
"the dominant culture." She and Applegate joined forces in 1997, shortly after her
husband died. He helped her move on after her loss; she eased his loneliness and
turned him into a phenomenally healthful eater. She typically serves him a breakfast
that includes triticale flakes, buckwheat groats and pumpkin seeds.
Applegate and Sweedler see eye to eye on religious, environmental and political
matters: Her late husband, Walter, was also an atheist. App and Rivkah are outspoken
advocates of open-field defecation. They deeply dislike President Bush.
Sweedler will be the ship's cook and has already filled the Aproximada's larder with
bulk organic foods. While she is not nearly as excited about living in Cuba as
Applegate is, she's trying to keep an open mind.
The position of onboard engineer could also be filled. It might be Barbara Roddy,
54, who has a degree in combustion engineering from the University of California
at Davis. She has helped Applegate do much of the mechanical and electrical work
on his boat. Roddy makes her living on Orcas as a fix-it person, hot-tub sales agent
and specialty-cruise guide. She runs Captain Barb's Mechanical Wizardry and leads
Captain Barb's Lesbian Cruises and Adventures.
When Applegate retired to five acres of forest on Orcas Island's Mount Pickett in
1977, he had no intention of ever living anywhere else.
"I had had it," he said. "I was just going to vegetate."
Born and raised in the Northwest, he was retired from a number of professions that
had taken him from Honolulu to Yaounde, Cameroon, but had never made him much
money.
With a master's degree in physics, he had been a college professor, a guide for
cruises around the Hawaiian Islands and the self-taught builder of a 100-foot steel
sailboat that he captained along the Eastern Seaboard. (He sold it for next to
nothing, and it later sank.) His last job was in 1976, as a Peace Corps worker in
Cameroon.
Settling in on Orcas, Applegate promised himself that he would stay away from boats.
"Too much work," he said. "I didn't want to build any damn vessel."
Yet one thing led to another. He had time on his hands. The Social Security checks
kept coming in. He became curious about the Douglas firs on the island. Could
they be made into a substantial sailing vessel?
Applegate is not without social skills. It did not take long for word to get out among
the 3,500 year-round residents of Orcas Island that the little white-bearded socialist
on Mount Pickett was witty, self-deprecating and a good listener. He also has a
gift for persuading islanders to volunteer their time and power tools for his boat.
Over the years, they have painted the Aproximada, hoisted its heavy beams and
helped rig its sails.
"Here is a man who started this project when he was 70, an age when most men
sit back, watch television and give up," said Joe Goodrich, 58, who owns a roof
and deck cleaning business on Orcas and often helps Applegate with heavy
lifting up on the mountain. "App is a powerful example of what you can do if you
don't quit."
In the 15 years that Applegate has been building his boat, Orcas Island, which
is an hour by ferry from the mainland, has become the preferred summer
destination for Seattle's high-tech millionaires.
As property values have soared, farmers and commercial fishermen have all but
disappeared. Most year-round island residents have found jobs in the service
industry -- taking care of rich people's houses, boats, cars, lawns and children.
The Vineyardification of Orcas has increased the value of Applegate's five
scruffy acres more than tenfold -- but otherwise it has left him alone, at least so far.
"The folks who show up in designer cars and designer suits soon figure out the
best way to get along on this island is to try to fit in," said John B. Evans, a
Republican county commissioner and a close neighbor of Applegate's. Evans
lent him a grinder to smooth the hull of the Aproximada.
County authorities are well aware that Applegate's shack and sanitary facilities are
not up to county codes, Evans said.
"All the rules aren't followed all the time," he said. "We have million-dollar houses
next door to yurts. The culture supports that. And people like App. He is so far
out there, it makes for interesting conversation."
Applegate, though, wants out. If push came to shove, he said, he could probably
get the boat off the mountain in a week or two.
His plan involves two large bulldozers, signed waivers from downhill neighbors
and a bond to pay for damages -- if the boat runs amok and squashes a house
or two. Several people who know details of the plan say there is a good chance
it will work.
Applegate, though, has to wait for more Social Security checks to bankroll the
plan. He also needs more crew to sail the boat. He doesn't appear especially
panicked about the lack of either.
Thanks to Sweedler, he has constant companionship and eats well. His health
is excellent. Nearly every day, friends drive up the mountain to check on him,
work on the boat and review the countless ways in which the United States is
succumbing to moral and environmental rot. Some of these friends wonder
privately if the Aproximada will ever get out of the woods.
Applegate, himself, acknowledges only one time-related reason to get the boat
off the mountain and sail away: Castro could drop dead.
© 2004 The Washington Post Company
As the beetle burrows in, the tree begins its defense. Resin oozes
from the bark to surround the beetle. If the tree is healthy the resin
washes the beetle out. But if the tree is weak the beetle will penetrate
the bark in several hours. There it sends out pheromones, chemical
signals that let other beetles know that here is a tree that can be
invaded.
GOAT DAIRY
White City, Oregon
For the real West Nile Virus story see: http://Baltech.org/lederman/spray/
For the street artist issue see: http://www.openair.org/alerts/artist/nyc.html
Feel Free to Forward http://www.baltech.org/lederman/
For a few of thousands of links to CIA-media material see:
|
For mainstream references to the CIA-media connection see: John M. Crewdson and Joseph B. Treaster, "The CIA's
3-Decade Effort to Mold the World's Views," New York Times, 25 December 1977, pp. 1, 12; Terrence Smith, "CIA
Contacts With Reporters," New York Times, p. 13; Crewdson and Treaster, "Worldwide Propaganda Network Built by the
CIA," New York Times, 26 December 1977, pp. 1, 37; Crewdson and Treaster, "CIA Established Many Links to Journalists
in U.S. and Abroad," New York Times, 27 December 1977, pp. 1, 40-41.
Also see: Networks of Power, by Dennis Mazzocco.
The CIA and the Media published by the U.S. House of Representatives in 1978.
Robert Lederman, President of A.R.T.I.S.T. (Artistsâ?T Response To Illegal State Tactics)
ARTISTpres@aol.com (718) 743-3722
Robert Lederman is an artist, a regular columnist for the Greenwich Village Gazette
[See: http://www.gvny.com/ for an extensive
archive of Lederman columns] The Shadow, The African Sun Times, The Vigo-Examiner
[see: http://www.vigo-examiner.com/archive.htm] and Street News, and is the author of
hundreds of published essays concerning Mayor Rudolph Giuliani.
Lederman has been falsely arrested 41 Times to date for his anti-Giuliani activities and has never been convicted of
any of the charges. He is best known for creating hundreds of paintings of Mayor Giuliani as a Hitler like dictator.
Robert Lederman,
President of A.R.T.I.S.T.
(Artists' Response To Illegal State Tactics)
a must read http://veritas.20m.com/
It apears that a malfuncrion has destroyed much of the origonal Ledereman links so I have linked to a Wayback URL that does the trick for now.
Web enhanced solutions to a variety of problems Appointments by referral only! Baltech is proud to host:
To a Directory of Mr.Lederman's Essays
We also recommend visiting the Public Housing Spotlight
|
Robert Lederman, President of A.R.T.I.S.T. (Artists' Response To Illegal State Tactics)
 |
Manhattan Institute/
Alliance Capital Management/
Enron and the
Bush administration:
It just keeps getting deeper
by Robert Lederman
robert.lederman@worldnet.att.net
March 4, 2002
http://www.altavista.com/web/results?pg=q&kl=XX&q=The+Bush+family+fortune+came+from+the+Third+Reich.
AltaVista found 747 results About
* The Third Reich and the Bush family.
The Bush family fortune came from the Third Reich. ... Adolf Hitler) Back The Bush
family fortune came from the Third Reich (Nazis). Bush Financed Hitler. Bush family
and fascism, Bush ...
How the Bush family made its fortune from the Nazis
Leonard Horowitz received his doctorate from Tufts University and was awarded a ... Click
Here for Details How the Bush family made its fortune from the Nazis Posted by Robert
Lederman mailto ...
Author links Bush family to Nazis
Author links Bush family to Nazis. ... bank as part of that dissolution. "That's where the
Bush family fortune came from: It came from the Third Reich," Loftus said. Loftus
made his remarks ...
A presidential visit to Auschwitz The Holocaust and the Bush family fortune
... visit to Auschwitz The Holocaust and the Bush family fortune By Bill Vann 5 June
2003 Use ... the words spoken by President George Bush as he emerged from a guided
tour of the gas chambers at ...
Bush's Grandfather Linked To Nazis Says FL Holocaust Museum
... 5 million from the bank as part of that dissolution. "That's where the Bush family
fortune came from: It came from the Third Reich," Loftus said. Loftus made his
remarks during a speech as part of ...
... Museum President Links Bush Family To Nazis Sarasota ... part of that
dissolution. "That's where the Bush family fortune came from: It came
from the Third Reich," Loftus said. Loftus made his ...
... long associated with the Bush family. Seventy years ago a ... of the Florida Holocaust
Museum — "The Bush family fortune came from the Third Reich,"according to the
Sarasota Herald-Tribune. Along ...
Infowars: Talk radio's Alex Jones's official news website battles the New World Order with
daily ... That's where the Bush family fortune came from: It came from the Third
Reich," Loftus said ...
... of action that could have ruined Bush's political dreams." "The Bush family fortune
came from the Third Reich." -John Loftus, former US Justice Dept. Nazi War Crimes
investigator and President of ...
... part of that dissolution. "That's where the Bush family fortune came from: It came
from the Third Reich," Loftus said. Loftus made his ... pointed out that the Bush family
would not be the only ...
|
Last week I sent out an essay about GW Bush's extensive ties to the Manhattan Institute [MI]
a far right think tank founded by the CIA. Now the South Florida Sentinel has published a story detailing the think tanks ties to Jeb Bush and to Alliance Capital Management, Enron's top shareholder SEE:
for the Sun-Sentinel article, my previous article and many other quotes on MI]. It turns out that
ACM is run by the top board members of MI while MI is financed by JP Morgan/Chase - the
bank behind both Enron and GW Bush.
From: South Florida Sun-Sentinel
Praise for Bush policy questioned
By Tamara Lytle and Lori Horvitz
Washington Bureau March 2, 2002
WASHINGTON
|
How the Bush family made its fortune from the Nazis
by Robert Lederman
February 9, 2002
Note: This article's author, John Loftus, is a former U.S.Department of Justice Nazi War Crimes prosecutor, the
President of the Florida Holocaust Museum and the highly respected author of numerous books on the CIA-Nazi
connection including The Belarus Secret and The SecSecret War Against the Jews, both of which have extensive
material on the Bush-Rockefeller-Nazi connection.
|
Copyright September 27, 2000
by Attorney John Loftus
The Dutch Connection
How a famous American family
made its fortune from the Nazis
For the Bush family, it is a lingering nightmare. For their Nazi clients, the Dutch connection was the
mother of all money laundering schemes. From 1945 until 1949, one of the lengthiest and, it now
appears, most futile interrogations of a Nazi war crimes suspect began in the American Zone of
Occupied Germany. Multibillionaire steel magnate Fritz Thyssen-the man whose steel combine
was the cold heart of the Nazi war machine-talked and talked and talked to a joint US-UK interrogation team. For four long years, successive teams of inquisitors tried to break Thyssen's
simple claim to possess neither foreign bank accounts nor interests in foreign corporations, no
assets that might lead to the missing billions in assets of the Third Reich. The inquisitors failed
utterly.
Why? Because what the wily Thyssen deposed was, in a sense, true. What the Allied investigators
never understood was that they were not asking Thyssen the right question. Thyssen did not need
any foreign bank accounts because his family secretly owned an entire chain of banks. He did not
have to transfer his Nazi assets at the end of World War II, all he had to do was transfer the
ownership documents - stocks, bonds, deeds and trusts--from his bank in Berlin through his
bank in Holland to his American friends in New York City: Prescott Bush and Herbert Walker.
Thyssen's partners in crime were the father and father-in-law of a future President of the United
States.
The allied investigators underestimated Thyssen's reach, his connections, his motives, and his means. The web of financial entities Thyssen helped create in the 1920's remained a mystery
for the rest of the twentieth century, an almost perfectly hidden underground sewer pipeline for moving dirty money, money that bankrolled the post-war fortunes not only of the Thyssen industrial empire...
but the Bush family as well. It was a secret Fritz Thyssen would take to his grave.
It was a secret that would lead former US intelligence agent William Gowen, now pushing 80, to
the very doorstep of the Dutch royal family. The Gowens are no strangers to controversy or
nobility.
His father was one of President Roosevelt's diplomatic emissaries to Pope Pius XII, leading a
futile attempt to persuade the Vatican to denounce Hitler's treatment of Jews. It was his son,
William Gowen, who served in Rome after World War II as a Nazi hunter and investigator with
the U.S. Army Counter Intelligence Corps. It was Agent Gowen who first discovered the secret Vatican Ratline for smuggling Nazis in 1949. It was also the same William Gowen who began to uncover the secret Dutch pipeline for smuggling Nazi money in 1999.
A half-century earlier, Fritz Thyssen was telling the allied investigators that he had no interest in foreign companies, that Hitler had turned on him and seized most of his property. His remaining assets were mostly in the Russian Occupied Zone of Germany (which he knew were a write-off anyway). His distant (and disliked) relatives in neutral nations like Holland were the actual
owners of a substantial percentage of the remaining German industrial base. As innocent victims
of the Third Reich, they were lobbying the allied occupation governments in Germany, demanding restitution of the property that had been seized from them by the Nazis.
Under the rules of the Allied occupation of Germany, all property owned by citizens of a neutral
nation which had been seized by the Nazis had to be returned to the neutral citizens upon proper presentation of documents showing proof of ownership. Suddenly, all sorts of neutral parties, particularly in Holland, were claiming ownership of various pieces of the Thyssen empire. In
his cell, Fritz Thyssen just smiled and waited to be released from prison while members of
the Dutch royal family and the Dutch intelligence service reassembled his pre-war holdings
for him.
The British and American interrogators may have gravely underestimated Thyssen but they nonetheless knew they were being lied to. Their suspicions focused on one Dutch Bank in
particular, the Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart, in Rotterdam. This bank did a lot of business
with the Thyssens over the years. In 1923, as a favor to him, the Rotterdam bank loaned the
money to build the very first Nazi party headquarters in Munich. But somehow the allied investigations kept going nowhere, the intelligence leads all seemed to dry up.
If the investigators realized that the US intelligence chief in postwar Germany, Allen Dulles, was
also the Rotterdam bank's lawyer, they might have asked some very interesting questions. They
did not know that Thyssen was Dulles' client as well. Nor did they ever realize that it was Allen Dulles's other client, Baron Kurt Von Schroeder who was the Nazi trustee for the Thyssen
companies which now claimed to be owned by the Dutch. The Rotterdam Bank was at the heart
of Dulles' cloaking scheme, and he guarded its secrets jealously.
Several decades after the war, investigative reporter Paul Manning, Edward R. Murrow's
colleague, stumbled across the Thyssen interrogations in the US National Archives. Manning intended to write a book about Nazi money laundering. Manning's manuscript was a dagger at
Allen Dulles' throat: his book specifically mentioned the Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart by
name, albeit in passing. Dulles volunteered to help the unsuspecting Manning with his manuscript,
and sent him on a wild goose chase, searching for Martin Bormann in South America.
|
Without knowing that he had been deliberately sidetracked, Manning wrote a forward to his book personally thanking Allen Dulles for his "assurance that I was "on the right track, and should keep going.'"Dulles sent Manning and his manuscript off into the swamps of obscurity. The same
"search for Martin Bormann"scam was also used to successfully discredit Ladislas Farago,
another American journalist probing too far into the laundering of Nazi money. American investigators had to be sent anywhere but Holland.
And so the Dutch connection remained unexplored until 1994 when I published the book "The
Secret War Against the Jews."As a matter of historical curiosity, I mentioned that Fritz Thyssen
(and indirectly, the Nazi Party) had obtained their early financing from Brown Brothers Harriman,
and its affiliate, the Union Banking Corporation. Union Bank, in turn, was the Bush family's holding
company for a number of other entities, including the "Holland American Trading Company."
It was a matter of public record that the Bush holdings were seized by the US government after
the Nazis overran Holland. In 1951, the Bush's reclaimed Union Bank from the US Alien Property Custodian, along with their "neutral" Dutch assets. I did not realize it, but I had stumbled across
a very large piece of the missing Dutch connection. Bush's ownership of the Holland-American investment company was the missing link to Manning's earlier research in the Thyssen
investigative files. In 1981, Manning had written:
"Thyssen's first step in a long dance of tax and currency frauds began [in the late 1930's] when
he disposed of his shares in the Dutch Hollandische-Amerikanische Investment Corporation to be credited to the Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart, N.V., Rotterdam, the bank founded in 1916 by August Thyssen Senior."
In this one obscure paragraph, in a little known book, Manning had unwittingly documented two intriguing points: 1) The Bush's Union Bank had apparently bought the same corporate stock
that the Thyssens were selling as part of their Nazi money laundering, and 2) the Rotterdam
Bank, far from being a neutral Dutch institution, was founded by Fritz Thyssen's father. In
hindsight, Manning and I had uncovered different ends of the Dutch connection.
After reading the excerpt in my book about the Bush's ownership of the Holland-American trading
Company, retired US intelligence agent William Gowen began to put the pieces of the puzzle
together. Mr. Gowen knew every c orner of Europe from his days as a diplomat's son, an American
intelligence agent, and a newspaperman. William Gowen deserves sole credit for uncovering
the mystery of how the Nazi industrialists hid their money from the Allies at the end of World War II.
In 1999, Mr. Gowen traveled to Europe, at his own expense, to meet a former member of Dutch intelligence who had detailed inside information about the Rotterdam bank. The scrupulous
Gowen took a written statement and then had his source read and correct it for error. Here, in summary form, is how the Nazis hid their money in America.
After World War I, August Thyssen had been badly burned by the loss of assets under the harsh terms of the Versailles treaty. He was determined that it would never happen again. One of his
sons would join the Nazis; the other would be neutral. No matter who won the next war, the
Thyssen family would survive with their industrial empire intact. Fritz Thyssen joined the Nazis in 1923; his younger brother married into Hungarian nobility and changed his name to Baron
Thyssen-Bornemisza.
The Baron later claimed Hungarian as well as Dutch citizenship. In public, he pretended to detest his Nazi brother, but in private they met at secret board meetings in Germany to coordinate their operations. If one brother were threatened with loss of property, he would transfer his holdings
to the other.
To aid his sons in their shell game, August Thyssen had established three different banks during the 1920's -- The August Thyssen Bank in Berlin, the Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart in Rotterdam, and the Union Banking Corporation in New York City. To protect their corporate holdings, all the brothers had to do was move the corporate paperwork from one bank to the other. This they did with some regularity. When Fritz Thyssen "sold"the Holland-American Trading Company for a tax loss, the Union Banking Corporation in New York bought the stock. Similarly, the Bush family invested the disguised Nazi profits in American steel and manufacturing corporations that became part of the secret Thyssen empire.
|
When the Nazis invaded Holland in May 1940, they investigated the Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart in Rotterdam. Fritz Thyssen was suspected by Hitler's auditors of being a tax fraud
and of illegally transferring his wealth outside the Third Reich. The Nazi auditors were right:
Thyssen felt that Hitler's economic policies would dilute his wealth through ruinous war inflation.
He had been smuggling his war profits out through Holland. But the Rotterdam vaults were empty
of clues to where the money had gone. The Nazis did not know that all of the documents evidencing
secret Thyssen ownership had been quietly shipped back to the August Thyssen Bank in Berlin, under the friendly supervision of Baron Kurt Von Schroeder. Thyssen spent the rest of the war under
VIP house arrest. He had fooled Hitler, hidden his immense profits, and now it was time to fool
the Americans with same shell game.
As soon as Berlin fell to the allies, it was time to ship the documents back to Rotterdam so that
the "neutral"bank could claim ownership under the friendly supervision of Allen Dulles, who, as
the OSS intelligence chief in 1945 Berlin, was well placed to handle any troublesome
investigations. Unfortunately, the August Thyssen Bank had been bombed during the war,
and the documents were buried in the underground vaults beneath the rubble. Worse, the vaults
lay in the Soviet Zone of Berlin.
According to Gowen's source, Prince Bernhard commanded a unit of Dutch intelligence, which
dug up the incriminating corporate papers in 1945 and brought them back to the "neutral"bank
in Rotterdam. The pretext was that the Nazis had stolen the crown jewels of his wife, Princess
Juliana, and the Russians gave the Dutch permission to dig up the vault and retrieve them. Operation Juliana was a Dutch fraud on the Allies who searched high and low for the missing
pieces of the Thyssen fortune.
In 1945, the former Dutch manager of the Rotterdam bank resumed control only to discover that he
was sitting on a huge pile of hidden Nazi assets. In 1947, the manager threatened to inform Dutch
authorities, and was immediately fired by the Thyssens. The somewhat naive bank manager then
fled to New York City where he intended to talk to Union Bank director Prescott Bush. As Gowen's
Dutch source recalled, the manager intended "to reveal [to Prescott Bush] the truth about Baron Heinrich and the Rotterdam Bank, [in order that] some or all of the Thyssen interests in the
Thyssen Group might be seized and confiscated as German enemy property."The manager's
body was found in New York two weeks later.
Similarly, in 1996 a Dutch journalist Eddy Roever went to London to interview the Baron, who
was neighbors with Margaret Thatcher. Roever's body was discovered two days later. Perhaps,
Gowen remarked dryly, it was only a coincidence that both healthy men had died of heart attacks immediately after trying to uncover the truth about the Thyssens.
Neither Gowen nor his Dutch source knew about the corroborating evidence in the Alien Property
Custodian archives or in the OMGUS archives. Together, the two separate sets of US files overlap
each other and directly corroborate Gowen's source. The first set of archives confirms absolutely
that the Union Banking Corporation in New York was owned by the Rotterdam Bank. The second
set (quoted by Manning) confirms that the Rotterdam Bank in turn was owned by the Thyssens.
It is not surprising that these two American agencies never shared their Thyssen files. As the
noted historian Burton Hersh documented:
"The Alien Property Custodian, Leo Crowley, was on the payroll of the New York J. Henry
Schroeder Bank where Foster and Allen Dulles both sat as board members. Foster arranged
an appointment for himself as special legal counsel for the Alien Property Custodian while simultaneously representing [German] interests against the custodian."
No wonder Allen Dulles had sent Paul Manning on a wild goose chase to South America. He was very close to uncovering the fact that the Bush's bank in New York City was secretly owned by the Nazis, before during and after WWII. Once Thyssen ownership of the Union Banking Corporation
is proven, it makes out a prima facie case of treason against the Dulles and Bush families for
giving aid and comfort to the enemy in time of war.
PART TWO
|
The first key fact to be proven in any criminal case is that the Thyssen family secretly owned the Bush's Bank. Apart from Gowen's source, and the twin American files, a third set of corroboration comes from the Thyssen family themselves. In 1979, the present Baron Thyssen-Bornemisza
(Fritz Thyssen's nephew) prepared a written family history to be shared with his top management.
A copy of this thirty-page tome entitled "The History of the Thyssen Family and Their Activities"
was provided by Gowen's source. It contains the following Thyssen admissions:
"Thus, at the beginning of World War II the Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart had become the holding of my father's companies - a Dutch firm whose only shareholder was a Hungarian citizen..Prior to 1929, it held the shares of .the August Thyssen Bank, and also American subsidiaries and the Union Banking Corporation, New York.The shares of all the affiliates
were [in 1945] with the August Thyssen Bank in the East Sector of Berlin, from where I was
able to have them transferred into the West at the last moment"
"After the war the Dutch government ordered an investigation into the status of the holding
company and, pending the result, appointed a Dutch.former general manager of my father who turned against our family.. In that same year, 1947, I returned to Germany for the first time after
the war, disguised as a Dutch driver in military uniform, to establish contact with our German directors"
"The situation of the Group gradually began to be resolved but it was not until 1955 that the
German companies were freed from Allied control and subsequently disentangled. Fortunately,
the companies in the group suffered little from dismantling. At last we were in a position to concentrate on purely economic problems -- the reconstruction and extension of the companies
and the expansion of the organization."
"The banking department of the Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart, which also functioned as the Group's holding company, merged in 1970 with Nederlandse Credietbank N.V. which increased
its capital. The Group received 25 percent.The Chase Manhattan Bank holds 31%. The name
Thyssen-Bornemisza Group was selected for the new holding company."
Thus the twin US Archives, Gowen's Dutch source, and the Thyssen family history all
independently confirm that President Bush's father and grandfather served on the board of
a bank that was secretly owned by the leading Nazi industrialists. The Bush connection to these American institutions is a matter of public record. What no one knew, until Gowen's brilliant
research opened the door, was that the Thyssens were the secret employers of the Bush family.
But what did the Bush family know about their Nazi connection and when did they know it?
As senior managers of Brown Brothers Harriman, they had to have known that their American clients, such as the Rockefellers, were investing heavily in German corporations, including
Thyssen's giant Vereinigte Stahlwerke. As noted historian Christopher Simpson repeatedly documents, it is a matter of public record that Brown Brother's investments in Nazi Germany
took place under the Bush family stewardship.
When war broke out was Prescott Bush stricken with a case of Waldheimers disease, a sudden amnesia about his Nazi past? Or did he really believe that our friendly Dutch allies owned the
Union Banking Corporation and its parent bank in Rotterdam? It should be recalled that in January 1937, he hired Allen Dulles to "cloak"his accounts. But cloak from whom? Did he expect that happy little Holland was going to declare war on America? The cloaking operation only makes sense in anticipation of a possible war with Nazi Germany. If Union Bank was not the conduit for laundering the Rockefeller's Nazi investments back to America, then how could the Rockefeller-controlled Chase Manhattan Bank end up owning 31% of the Thyssen group after the war?
It should be noted that the Thyssen group (TBG) is now the largest industrial conglomerate in Germany, and with a net worth of more than $50 billion dollars, one of the wealthiest corporations
in the world. TBG is so rich it even bought out the Krupp family, famous arms makers for Hitler, leaving the Thyssens as the undisputed champion survivors of the Third Reich. Where did the Thyssens get the start-up money to rebuild their empire with such speed after World War II?
The enormous sums of money deposited into the Union Bank prior to 1942 is the best evidence
that Prescott Bush knowingly served as a money launderer for the Nazis. Remember that Union Banks' books and accounts were frozen by the U.S. Alien Property Custodian in 1942 and not released back to the Bush family until 1951. At that time, Union Bank shares representing hundreds of millions of dollars worth of industrial stocks and bonds were unblocked for distribution. Did the Bush family really believe that such enormous sums came from Dutch enterprises? One could sell tulip bulbs
and wooden shoes for centuries and not achieve those sums. A fortune this size could only have come from the Thyssen profits made from rearming the Third Reich, and then hidden, first from the Nazi tax auditors, and then from the Allies.
The Bushes knew perfectly well that Brown Brothers was the American money channel into Nazi Germany, and that Union Bank was the secret pipeline to bring the Nazi money back to America from Holland. The Bushes had to have known how the secret money circuit worked because they were on the board of directors in both directions: Brown Brothers out, Union Bank in.
Moreover, the size of their compensation is commensurate with their risk as Nazi money launderers. In 1951, Prescott Bush and his father in law each received one share of Union Bank stock, worth $750,000 each. One and a half million dollars was a lot of money in 1951. But then, from the
Thyssen point of view, buying the Bushes was the best bargain of the war.
|
The bottom line is harsh: It is bad enough that the Bush family helped raise
the money for Thyssen to give Hitler his start in the 1920's, but giving aid
and comfort to the enemy in time of war is treason. The Bush's bank
helped the Thyssens make the Nazi steel that killed allied soldiers. As bad
as financing the Nazi war machine may seem, aiding and abetting the
Holocaust was worse. Thyssen's coal mines used Jewish slaves as if they
were disposable chemicals. There are six million skeletons in the Thyssen
family closet, and a myriad of criminal and historical questions to be
answered about the Bush family's complicity.
|
SLATE.COM - April 17, 2002
By Anne E. Kornblut
(Click Here for original Web link.)
The Bush family and the Jews
Unlike his father and grandfather, George W. has crafted a pro-Jewish image.
Flanked by Jewish leaders, President George W. Bush signed a proclamation March 25 recognizing the commitment to education demonstrated by the late leader of the Jewish Lubavitcher movement, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson.
In 1998, George W. Bush took his first and only trip to the Holy Land. During a helicopter tour - guided
by none other than Ariel Sharon - Bush was astonished to discover how tiny Israel is compared to its Arab neighbors. He later described the visit as one of the most meaningful experiences of his life.
A photographer captured a striking image of Bush, in a yarmulke, standing reverently at the Wailing Wall.
THE PICTURE may be a symbol of Bush foreign policy these days, but it speaks to an even more startling truth: Bush is the first in his family of politicians to craft a pro-Jewish image.
Starting with accusations that Prescott Bush was a Nazi collaborator before Pearl Harbor, the Bush dynasty has generally been viewed with suspicion and at times outright hostility by Jewish Americans. The elder President Bush outraged the Jewish community with a series of perceived insults. Before he became president, the younger Bush, who once expressed doubt about whether non-Christians could get into heaven, seemed likely to follow in the family tradition.
THE FAMILY TREE
The charges against Sen. Prescott Bush, the grandfather of the current president, went beyond the disdain for Jews and discriminatory practices that were characteristic of New England WASP culture in his day. Prescott Bush was a director of a New York bank where rich Germans who supported the Nazis stashed millions in personal wealth. He was still a director at the bank, Union Banking Corp., when its assets were frozen under the Trading With the Enemy Act in 1941 - a fact that has provided endless fodder for leftists and conspiracy theorists since it came to light in the 1990s.
George Herbert Walker Bush shared the same exclusionary pedigree as his father, starting with Yale and the secret society Skull & Bones, and had extensive ties to Arabs though the oil industry as well. But most Jews did not consider him unfriendly to their interests so long as he served under Ronald Reagan. Reagan was the first Republican in 80 years to win a sizable share of the Jewish vote. There were a variety of reasons for this, but the key issue was Reagan's hard line on the defense of Israel, which he considered a crucial democratic outpost in the fight against Soviet communism. In the 1980 election, Jimmy Carter won 45 percent of the Jewish vote. Reagan won 39 percent.
HARD LINE ON ISRAEL
That remarkable shift, however, began to be undone almost as soon as George H.W. Bush took over in 1989. Bush was a self-described pragmatist in international affairs, and in the giddy early days after the end of the Cold War, it was no longer fashionable to view the world in binary terms. As a result, many conservative ideological causes - among them Israel - no longer found a champion in the White House. The point was made most clearly when Bush demanded, in 1991, that the Israelis stop building new settlements in Palestinian-controlled territories. Unlike previous presidents, Bush sounded serious, threatening to block millions in loan guarantees if Israel disobeyed. (Later, when his re-election was in doubt in 1992, Bush promised to press Congress for the loan guarantees unconditionally.)
Just as damaging was the elder Bush's knack for seeming as out of touch with Jewish voters as he did with everyone else. Once, during a 1991 White House press conference, Bush Sr. complained about the strength of the Jewish lobby on Capitol Hill - the implication being that "Jews work insidiously behind the scenes," as David J. Forman wrote in the Jerusalem Post. On another occasion, Bush reminded his critics that the United States gives "Israel the equivalent of $1,000 for every Israeli citizen," a remark that detractors took as an allusion to the stereotype of Jews as money-obsessed and greedy.
And then there was Secretary of State James Baker's infamous "f-- the Jews" remark. In a private conversation with a colleague about Israel, Baker reportedly uttered the vulgarity, noting that Jews "didn't vote for us anyway." This was more or less true - Bush got 27 percent of the Jewish vote, compared with 73 percent for Dukakis, in 1988. And thanks in part to Baker, it was even truer in 1992, when Bill Clinton got 78 percent of the Jewish vote and Bush got only 15 percent - the poorest showing by a Republican candidate since Barry Goldwater in 1964.
COURTING THE JEWISH VOTE
In 2000, as Al Gore hit the campaign trail with the first Jewish vice presidential running mate in U.S. history on his ticket, George W. Bush seemed to make only a half-hearted attempt to compete for Jewish votes. He paid the obligatory dues, speaking at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and visiting the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles (where, after touring the sobering Holocaust exhibit, he incongruously signed the guest book, "God bless this world!"). But Bush reserved his real pitch for Arab-Americans, whom his strategists viewed as an increasingly powerful voting bloc. Repeated trips to Michigan, a swing state, gave Bush ample opportunity to meet with Arab-American leaders, heavily concentrated around Detroit. Ironically, he made a campaign pledge to examine "secret evidence" cases against foreign suspects, a matter of great concern among Arab-Americans (and one that fell by the wayside after Sept. 11).
Like his father, Bush failed during the campaign to win over neoconservative Jewish intellectuals - most notably William Kristol, who openly backed John McCain. The problem wasn't just the assumption that he shared his father's coolness toward Israel. It was also his perceived insensitivity toward Jews, as characterized by the only-Christians-in-heaven remark. Bush later joked about the uproar caused by the exchange. Asked by a reporter what he planned to tell the Israelis as he prepared to embark on his 1998 trip to the Middle East, Bush replied, obviously in jest, "Go to hell." Gore got 79 percent of the Jewish vote. Bush got only 19 percent.
BREAK FROM PAST
Unlike his father, George W. Bush has risen in the esteem of many prominent Jews since taking office.
But unlike his father, who never managed to repair his relationship with the Jewish community despite several attempts, Bush has only risen in the esteem of many prominent Jews since taking office. The biggest factor is probably the Sept. 11 attacks. After a brief flurry of activity to win Arab support for the war on Afghanistan, Bush began to connect America's struggle against terrorism with Israel's fight against Palestinian suicide bombers. Though he was criticized for sitting on the sidelines as the Palestinian-Israeli conflict worsened, Bush arguably took sides by dropping the standard call for the Israelis to "show restraint." After briefly responding to international pressure to demand an Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank, Bush quickly backed off.
Another factor is shrewd political judgment. At pains to avoid repeating political mistakes his father made, Bush has actively courted conservatives within the Republican coalition. That includes Jewish neoconservatives such as Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, who hopes to encourage Bush to avoid another mistake of his father's - failing to topple Saddam Hussein. It was Wolfowitz who Bush sent to address the big pro-Israel rally that took place at the Capitol on April 15.
SINCERE WARMTH
But the biggest reason Bush has been able to win over Jews may be personal. Despite his own Skull & Bones pedigree, the president is far less WASP-ish in his tastes and manner than past generations of Bushes, making him less suspect in the eyes of some Jewish Americans. Moreover, he is openly religious in a way that conveys deep respect for religious believers of all kinds. He may even be influenced by the view of Gary Bauer and other fundamentalist Christians who believe that the Jews are biblically ordained to live in the Holy Land. And unlike his father's administration, George W. Bush's is prominently filled with members of the tribe. Most notably, the public face of the White House, spokesman Ari Fleischer, is a practicing Jew.
But whatever the impetus, Bush appears to be entirely sincere in his warmth toward the Jewish people. Since Sept. 11, he has resisted condemning his old tour guide, Ariel Sharon, as harshly as his father condemned former Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir. He has also applied the "Bush Doctrine" to Israel, saying in his April 4 Rose Garden address: "Terror must be stopped. No nation can negotiate with terrorists. For there is no way to make peace with those whose only goal is death." It's hard to imagine any Bush from a previous generation taking the side of the Jews so unequivocally.
Anne E. Kornblut
is White House correspondent
for the Boston Globe.
|
To a Directory of Mr.Lederman's Essays
Robert Lederman is an artist, a regular columnist for the Greenwich Village Gazette
[See: http://web.archive.org/web/20020612012350/http://www.gvny.com/ for an extensive
archive of Lederman columns] The Shadow, The African Sun Times, The Vigo-Examiner
[see: http://web.archive.org/web/20020612012350/http://www.vigo-examiner.com/archive.htm]
and Street News, and is the author of hundreds of published essays concerning Mayor Rudolph
Giuliani. Lederman has been falsely arrested 41 times to date for his anti-Giuliani activities and
has never been convicted of any of the charges. He is best known for creating hundreds of
paintings of Mayor Giuliani as a Hitler like dictator.Robert Lederman,
President of A.R.T.I.S.T.
(Artists' Response To Illegal State Tactics)
robert.lederman@worldnet.att.net
For a detailed exposition on the West Nile issue
For an article on the Manhattan Institute go to
Important Note:
Mr. Lederman has explained that his articles posted here are not to be taken as official statements by the No-Spray
Coalition of which he is a member or of the "No-Spray" lawsuit in which he is a plaintiff.
©2001 Baltech Productions. All rights reserved.
|
What happens if you melt diamond? No-one knows, because no one has
been able to do it. Despite carbon’s status as the ‘element of life’, its liquid
state is still a mystery. Now scientists from the Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory in California predict that carbon has not one, but two liquid states.
Well, perhaps we should not be too surprised. The two solid states of carbon
are well known, and utterly dissimilar. One is diamond -- hardest of all
materials and valued for its crystalline brilliance. The other is graphite -- dull
and black, and soft enough to rub off on your fingers. The difference between
the two is all down to the kind of chemical bonds that the carbon atoms form,
and it seems that this is what distinguishes the two putative liquid carbons too.
|
... Glosli and Ree found that their simulations predicted two types of liquid carbon
-- one with a higher density than the other -- from around 5,000 degrees at ...
[PS] Phase diagram of carbon at high pressures and temperatures
File Format: Adobe PostScript - View as Text
... 100 kbar. Motivated by a theoretical prediction [15] that two phases
of liquid carbon, one insulating and one metallic (see Fig. 1 ...
|
living off the grid state-run weapons laboratories (GS) Mohamed Ali Speak YOUR mind, don't back down To that proxided Linux Neo Arian Blond Bo (GS)
Subject: NSM syndrome Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 11:56:00 -0800 From: E
To: undisclosed-recipients:;
A nation afflicted with...national selective memory syndrome.
L.
Fmr. Top Republican Strategist Examines the History of the Bush Family
* Kevin Phillips, former top Republican strategist and author speaking at
Berkeley Community Theatre on January 18, 2004.
TRANSCRIPT
Kevin Phillips: What I'm going to try to talk about today will be --it's only
humorous in a kind of odd vein. It's the notion of having the Bushes as
America's first real dynasty, and what that signifies, and what it means, and how
it developed, and, more to the point, where it's going. I'll try to look at
this -- and I think it's an effective way to illustrate what they are, and some
of what's been carrying through in the Middle East.
I'll try to go through five episodes of Bushes and scandals in the Middle
East. It's not hard to do at all. That's the amazing thing, and we talk about the
economics and other aspects, things that have been omitted from the dialogue
in the last five or six years.
This is certainly one of them.
But let me start by talking about the question of "lying Presidents." Because
obviously, it didn't start with the Bushes. We can all remember Lyndon
Johnson, Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton. These were major league prevaricators.
That's a fact. But they were all first-generation fibbers.
What we're looking at with the Bushes is a multigenerational family of
fibbers. And they share aspects of this, and rationales and antecedents for the
pattern. They have a distinct logic. From the beginnings of the Bush Dynasty, in
the period around World War I, with two of the current President's
great-grandfathers, what we have had is a family that has emerged over the
years in close contact with whatEisenhower later referred to as the "military
industrial complex," and very close relations with the intelligence community,
and in a wholeseries of episodes that drew on the relations with armaments,
arms dealers, intelligence, rogue banks, all kinds of things like that.
And there's enough of a pattern that you would think that when the dynasty
was about to become fulfilled, if that's the word, by the advent of George W.,
that this would have been worth some comment.
Now, it's hard for me to make something funny out of this. It's kind of
tragic. As I go
through these five episodes quickly, you will notice that some of the people
that I refer to, who were involved in blowing the whistle on them, were
Republicans.
Part of what I think is at stake here tonight is understanding that there's
much more involved here than ordinary ideology. You're not in some respects
talking as much about left and right as you might think. This is a development in
American history that's rife with negative meaning, for democracy with a
small d and for republicanism with a small r, for American traditions going way
back.
So let me start by looking at the first of the Bush scandals, and I use the
term advisedly, going back to 1979 and 1980. Now, these all involve the Middle
East, which provides a framework for looking at exactly what has happened
here, and how this dynasty has absolutely unprecedented connections with
one part of the world to the enormous detriment of American policy, and I think
frankly, to the embarrassment of the United States, perhaps in 9-11, and certainly
in Iraq.
Let me start back in 1979. George Herbert Walker Bush decided, announced,
that he was running for President that year. Three years earlier, he had been the
director for about 13 or 14 months of the CIA. In that role, he was
principally involved with the concern that was growing about oil in the Middle
East because of the oil price increase.
He was involved in opening up and strengthening U.S. relations with the
intelligence services of Saudi Arabia and Iran, in particular. After this role, he
gets out, he takes
up a role as chairman of the executive committee of a major Texas bank,
spends a fair amount of time in London making contacts with Middle Eastern
financial institutions. In the meantime, Jimmy Carter, having taken over the
Presidency, fires a whole lot of people who have been in the clandestine covert
operations side of the CIA.
They leave office, and they're looking for a place to gather, politically,
governmentally,
what have you. In 1979, George Bush announces that he's running for
President. A lot of people in the Republican Party said "President of what?
President of a company or something?" It wasn't too easy to believe. Here was
a guy that had his clock cleaned running for senator from Texas twice, but he was
a certain type of a fungus. You can't get rid of him. He had real contacts, if you
know what I mean. He was a made man, in a certain sense.
Well, when he made his announcement, one of his consultants, who currently is
the president of the American Conservative Union, David Keene, said, and I
pretty much quote here, "Half of the people in the audience were wearing trench
coats." Now, this is significant because he left the CIA and became a
Presidential candidate with the unique set of relationships with the CIA.
Now, in 1980, the 50-odd hostages that had been seized in Iran by the Ayatollah's government were being held, and there was an attempt made to rescue them in April of 1980 by the Carter administration It didn't work. The helicopters were shot down. At this point, pollsters in both parties calculated that you had about six to ten points of the vote hanging on theoutcome of whether or not the hostages were released. If Carter could get them back,
that vote would swing to Carter, if not, that vote would swing to the Republican nominee who quickly became Ronald Reagan with George H.W. Bush as his running mate.
Now, in the summer, because of this enormous importance of the six to ten points on which the election was hanging and on which you had this focus on the return of the hostages, both sides got very much concerned with this; and the Republicans set something in motion, allegedly, that has been covered in several books, and became a scandal known as "The October Surprise."
In essence, there were ties sought, and then relationships opened with the Ayatollahs and the revolutionary government of Iran, and the allegation is, in these several books, that basically, contact was made by George Bush and Bill Casey, who later became the next CIA director, and had been in the OSS in World War II; and the point was that the Iranian government was being offered money and arms if they held onto the hostages. In other words, you don't free the hostages before the election. You hold onto them.
|
Now, I remember not paying too much attention to this. It became an issue in
1991 and 1992, belatedly, way after the event, because a group of scandals
were gathering around Bush, and this was one of them. A book came out in 1991
that was sort of dismissed by the media. It wasn't thought to have had all of the
necessary details and back-stopping.
But George Bush was defeated in 1992. He got 37.7% of the vote, the worst
showing for an incumbent president since William Howard Taft in 1912. He was
shellacked. So they just folded up the investigations of these different scandals.
But in December of 1992 and January of 1993, the congressional informal
investigation had received material from the French and from the Russians that
related to the fact that they had observed and noticed that these negotiations
were in fact held. A book was later published by Pierre Salinger, who was with
ABC news in France at the time, that made mention of these negotiations, and
the French intelligence people had helped Bill Casey arrange them.
So, there was confirmation from the French. It did not say that George H.W.
Bush was involved. The Russians sent back a communication that their intelligence
services had in fact observed, and been reported to, that the Republicans talked
to the Iranians in Paris, and that both George Bush and Bill Casey were there.
An Israeli agent named Ari Ben-Menashe said the same thing in a book, but he
was essentially repudiated by the Israeli government. He said he wasn't
anybody, he didn't know much, and that sort of dragged along. Nobody credited
him, but in 1998 an examination came out, the history of the Israeli Mossad, by
an English writer, that said basically, he was subject to a disinformation campaign.
This did in fact happen. So, there you are. There's recent material from the French,
from the Russians, and from the Israelis, that the odds are much higher that this
did in fact take place.
We had in 2000 an election said to be stolen, by some, by the Republicans.
You would think that some of this question about 1980 would have come up. It
never did. Frankly, I cannot say that I remembered it at the time. It was only
when I got into researching these continuities of scandals that it came up.
Let me turn to the second scandal. This one, you will remember. Everybody
remembers it: Iran-Contra. Iran-Contra was a sort of October Surprise II, in a
sense, because what you had was the provision, by the Reagan-Bush
administration, of arms to Iran in order to get help from the Iranian government, in
negotiating the release, by Islamic radicals in Lebanon, of a new set of American
hostages taken there.
This became known in late 1986, and a special prosecutor was appointed, and
he was not exactly a major Pinko or Liberal. He was Eisenhower's former deputy
Attorney General, Larry Walsh. He wound up indicting Casper Weinberger, the
Defense Secretary, and right before the election in '92, he made a re-indictment
of Weinberger, in which he discussed how George H.W. Bush had been in the
loop. He was part of this. There were two or three laws violated. It was serious
stuff.
Bush denied that he was in the loop. It was so close to the election. This
petered out after Bush was defeated, but in December of '92, Bush pardoned
Weinberger, so there could not be a trial, in which Weinberger would have
implicated Bush and some other people. So, that's the second of the scandals
in the Middle East.
The third scandal is something called "Iraqgate." Now most of you have
probably forgotten about Iraqgate. These things got pushed aside, when
George Bush was defeated in '92.
The upshot of Iraqgate was that George Bush, as Vice President, got involved
in a program of providing arms to Iraq and Saddam Hussein. Not just arms,
other supplies, dual use technology, biological cultures, nuclear know-how. All of
the sort of things that were described as existing in the form of weapons of
mass destruction in 2003.
You know, funny thing, the family had an acquaintance with this somewhat
earlier. Most of you won't remember this. That's the amazing thing. The media
people mostly do remember it. They may not remember it very sharply, but you
would think it was relevant.
Let me read you a quote from Ted Koppel. This was the introduction to ABC
news' "Newsnight" on June 9, 1992. "It is becoming increasingly clear that
George Bush, operating largely behind the scenes, through the 1980's, initiated
and supported much of the financing and intelligence and military help that built
Saddam's Iraq into the aggressive power that the United States ultimately had
to destroy."
It's quite an extraordinary circumstance. First time in American history that
a father, who was President, built up an enemy he had to fight, and then
passed on the animosity to his son, who had the second war. If you want a
dynastic element of history, you can look at that one. There was much more
to what happened in Iraq than just the simple building up and the war.
One of the points that I make in the book, and it's not hard to find the
material. Saddam invaded Kuwait in the beginning of August, 1990.
During June and July of 1990, the State Department people had been flashing
a green light to him to go ahead and take a small slice of the northern
remallia oil fields in Iraq. That's what he wanted. So, there are all of these quotes
from Margaret Tutwyler, who was Jimmy Baker's spokeswoman, and the assistant
Secretary of the near east, that we had no obligation to defend Kuwait. The
United States was not concerned about the oildisputes. It was repeated time after
time. We did not have a responsibility to defend Kuwait.
So, on August 2, after hearing all of this stuff, and after the CIA had
briefed President Bush Sr. on the fact that they were just expected to take a
little slice at the top of Kuwait, Saddam said, you know, why go for the bronze
when you can go for the gold? They went right in and they took Kuwait.
Now, this was, obviously, embarrassing to the administration potentially,
after all of the green lights and after all of the buildup. So, they had to take
Saddam, who, up to this point, was just your ordinary garden variety
authoritarian bum, and he had to become the second Hitler. That wasn't too
hard because you had a lot to work with. But essentially, they had to throw in a
little more for good luck.
There was a hearing conducted in Congress in 1990, in the fall, and there was
testimony by a 15-year-old Kuwaiti girl named Nahiryah, that 300-odd
premature babies had been ripped out of incubators by the Iraqis when they
invaded Kuwait.
Well, it turns out nobody -- no babies were ripped out of incubators. This
was pretty much made up, pumped up by a major U.S Public relations firm.
It was cited a number of times by president Bush, 312 babies ripped out of
incubators, but they weren't. This girl was the daughter of the Kuwaiti
ambassador to the United States. She was part of the ruling family.
So, what you have in here was just an enormous patchwork of lies and
fake-outs and deceits, and, as this became known better by people in 1991
and '92, it became an enormous problem for Bush. I would say that the
average American didn't know all about it, but enough people knew, and Bill
Safire, that notorious left-wing columnist for The New York Times, he was so
disgusted with Bush, he wrote a column saying how he couldn't endorse him
and couldn't vote for him in 1992 because of this.
There you have a succession of three scandals involving the first Bush
president in the Middle East.
Now we jump to a dual scandal that sort of picks up the continuity of
generations. This is the Bushes, BCCI and the bin Ladens. Now, they go back.
That's the thing. You wouldn't think that they do, but they do.
In the 1970's, when George Sr. was the C.I.A director, part of what he did,
to watch for developments in the Middle East and the oil industry, involved
enlisting as a C.I.A. asset a fellow named James Bath. This is reported in a book
by two Time magazine correspondents. Enlisted James Bath, who was the North
American representative of two Saudi families --the family of Khalid bin Mafus,
and the bin Laden family. But this was
Salem bin Laden. Nobody knew about Osama at that timme.
Then after his father was in the C.I.A., he leaves. He does his banking and
has his Middle East connections, but George W., at this point, is establishing
his famous first oil firm. This is Arbusto. Arbusto isSpanish for shrub. I
don't think he knew at the time shrub was going to be a nickname. It was Bush,
obviously.
So, it turns out as they're raising money for the firm, he gets $50,000 from
James Bath, the North American representative of the bin Ladens and the bin
Mafuses. According to the book by the two people from Time, they're sure that
Bath didn't use his own money, he used the money of his two client families in
Saudi Arabia. So, that's the first connection that brings the bin Ladens into
the Bush orbit.
Then we jump ahead to the 1990's. George senior gets out of office, gets out
of the Presidency, and he gets involved in the Carlyle group.
The Carlyle group is a merchant bank that I'm sure a number of you know. It
consisted of a number of senior people in the Bush and Reagan administrations,
Defense Secretary Carlucci, from the first Bush administration, Secretary of
State, Jimmy Baker. George Bush Sr., himself becomes a member of the advisory
board of the Carlyle group, gives speeches for them, raises money for them.
They wind up getting money from 12 Saudi families. And the Saudis are
encouraged to give, according to a story in the Washington Post, sort of out of
respect for former President Bush. Now, as most of you will probably guess,
what is the name of one of the 12 Saudi families, the bin Ladens. So, there they
are.
They're in the inner recesses of the Carlysle group and were up until 2001.
Nobody exactly knows what they all talked about at these various meetings, but
the media have identified that a planeload of bin
Ladens were sent back after 9-11, that a number of conferences included from
the Carlyle group the former President and some of the bin Ladens, but no real
details.
I should say that no family in the American presidency has ever been involved
in an overseas region like the Bushes have been involved in the Middle East.
George Bush Sr. had his first oil venture dealing with the Persian Gulf in
1961.
By 1980's, the family had basically come to see the region as a spigot. By
the 1990's, not only did you have George W. connected to BCCI and the
gulf oil people and the bin Laden family and et cetera, but you had his brothers.
His brother, who is now the Governor of Florida, has been reported to have
been very friendly during the early 1980's with the chief Washington and national representative of BCCI, the bank of credit and commerce international that funded
a lot of these arms operations. Also known in common parlance as the bank
of crooks and criminals internationally.
Jeb was friendly with a fellow who ran it who was based in Miami. Neil, of
course, this is the Silverado kid. America's moral exemplar from the oval
office. He has been involved with several different dimensions of this.
His business partner down in Houston was described as a Syrian-American
businessman in a big Financial Times article that appeared September 12.
He was also described, and I don't think I believe this, as one of the founders
of the Ba'ath party in Syria and Iraq. Kind of amazing.
Marvin Bush -- this is the youngest brother. Marvin Bush went to Kuwait after
the war, and made some good business connections. He became a shareholder
and director of Kuwait-American corporation and something called Secure-Acom,
partly owned by the Kuwatis. For several years, it was one of the contractors for
security at the World Trade Center before 2001. You know, that's kind of amazing,
I would think.
So, you have got Bushes and 9-11. What's the connection? Now, I don't think
that some of the groups that organize with a whole set of Halloween scary stuff
are making a great contribution, but I think there is a relationship.
Nobody knows quite what it is. Did the Saudi ties interfere with the
investigation of 9-11, or taking it seriously before it happened? Did the Saudi ties
provoke? Was this part of a reason why the animosity for the United States was
so strong? Was it connected to the family? Well, essentially, we don't know.
But there's some people concerned. You may have seen a former governor, Tom
Kean of New Jersey, running the 9-11 commission, very unhappy about not getting
the material
from the White House and suggesting that they might have to take measures.
He's a former Republican Governor of New Jersey. Well, then, by the time you
start adding up some of the Republicans in this, you may get the sense that this
is not that much, purely, a matter of ideology and I think that's right.
Now, let me turn to the question of Iraq, the inherited war. Now, this, to
me, is amazing that you could have had all of these developments in Iraqgate
that involve Bush Sr., and the media did not pick up on this, when we had George
W. taking office, virtually from the start, obviously looking for a war with
Iraq, and maneuvering towards it, and there was just no real linkage of his
role and his attitude with his father's circumstances. The lies about the weapons
of mass destruction go right back, and it reminds me of the whole business
about the 312 babies in the incubators that never existed and so forth. There's
seemingly no great compunction about making a lot of this stuff up.
The second thing is, you may remember, that right after 9-11, George W talked
about a crusade. Very unfortunate language, because there was nothing more
calculated to arouse the Muslims in the Middle East, but it wasn't just George
W., it was this personal circus of religious right leaders that he has dancing
around. Falwell referred to Mohammad as a terrorist. The great prophet of
Islam is a wild-eyed fanatic. Franklin Graham, Billie's son, "Islam is evil."
And Jerry Vines, head of the Southern Baptist convention, who referred to
Mohammad as a demon-possessed pedophile.
These people are unbelievable. We're trying to convince the Muslims that this
is not a holy war, and you have got all of these flaky fundamentalists running
loose with every sort of drivel that you can imagine.
And then a lot of people missed the personal aspect of all of this. When
George W. was down giving a speech to a Republican audience in Texas in
2002, he said that Iraq was a special preoccupation of the United States,
and he was referring to talk about an assassination attempt on his father.
He said, Iraq was a special U.S. preoccupation because they tried to kill my
dad. I mean, you don't start a war because of a rumored assassination attempt
on your father after he was out of office. You carry that as a grudge, but that's --
you know, that's something else.
Then you get here the incredible military incompetence of George W. Bush. I
don't see why this hasn't been an issue from word one. I'm not a total fan of
General Clark, but he seems to be making that an issue, and there's one thing
the Republicans cannot say about a man who has four stars on his uniform, and
that's that he is not a patriot. He's serving a very useful purpose there. But
you all remember the George W. and the great top gun moment in May, went out
to the carrier and land and announced that the fighting was over. You know, and
he wouldn't know fighting was over any more than a chocolate bar would know
what was happening in August sun
And worse than that -- and this is the sort of thing that ought to be raised
outside of every military base in the Sunbelt. I don't agree with whaat
Michael Moore said that George W. was a deserter from the Texas Air
National Guard. I think that's excessive.
You certainly cannot prove it. But what seems almost beyond a doubt was that
he was Absent Without Leave, and I think he should be renamed for the duration
of this fighting in the Middle East, Commander AWOL.
Let me stop here, and what I'll suggest, I'm going to make one suggestion to
Liberals, Progressives and Democrats -- these are the sort of issues, I think,
that if used correctly can do something that will have an enormous effect on
the 20004 election. They'll take back the American flag.
Thank you.
Floating Solar Powered Ligh
1
Perfect for your pond, water feature, swimming pool or on land. These attractive
robust, waterproof lights require no batteries and give up to 8 hours of light in a
choice of 3 colours, various, amber or green. And because its solar powered
there’s no mess and fuss, you just put it where you want. Each light has its own
integral solar panel and automatically switches on/off dependent on the ambient
light level. A lovely ingenious light at a lovely realistic price! Dimensions: 145mm
Dia x 85mmH.
2
Floating Solar Powered Globe
A brilliant addition to any water feature, pond or Hydrotherapy Pool, this item is at
home on land or water. Hide in your flower beds to change the look of your garden
at dusk. There’s no wiring or installation and no running costs because they’re solar
powered. Up 20 hours of light is emitted from the unit when fully charged. It comes
complete with a 5 inch snap on stake and pedestal stand for ground use.
72 00 04 Floating Solar Powered Globe £39.95
http://www.thesensorycompany.co.uk/catalog/ProductDetails.aspx?productID=397
This amazing unusual inflatable product is fantastic if you want to get away from it and
relax. It’s made from a strong, durable clear and white material that lets in loads of light
and looks marvellous when projected onto.
Can be used inside or as an outdoor activity and can be rolled with someone inside.
The internal individual cushions are a great idea, as they are as easy to clean as soft
play and if you inadvertently puncture one, the unit still stays inflated.
Big enough for two people, the Calm Cabin is a must for many!
Dimensions: 1800mm Diameter.
55 00 11 Calm Cabin £485.95
The United States currently relies heavily on coal, oil, and natural gas for its energy. Fossil fuels
are nonrenewable, that is, they draw on finite resources that will eventually dwindle, becoming too
expensive or too environmentally damaging to retrieve. In contrast, renewable energy
resources-such as wind and solar energy-are constantly replenished and will never run out.
Most renewable energy comes either directly or indirectly from the sun. Sunlight, or solar energy,
can be used directly for heating and lighting homes and other buildings, for generating electricity,
and for hot water heating, solar cooling, and a variety of commercial and industrial uses.
The sun's heat also drives the winds, whose energy is captured with wind turbines. Then, the
winds and the sun's heat cause water to evaporate. When this water vapor turns into rain or snow
and flows downhill into rivers or streams, its energy can be captured using hydroelectric power.
Along with the rain and snow, sunlight causes plants to grow. The organic matter that makes up
those plants is known as biomass. Biomass can be used to produce electricity, transportation
fuels, or chemicals. The use of biomass for any of these purposes is called biomass energy.
Hydrogen also can be found in many organic compounds, as well as water. It's the most
abundant element on the Earth. But it doesn't occur naturally as a gas. It's always combined with
other elements, such as with oxygen to make water. Once separated from another element,
hydrogen can be burned as a fuel or converted into electricity.
Not all renewable energy resources come from the sun. Geothermal energy taps the Earth's
internal heat for a variety of uses, including electric power production, and the heating and cooling
of buildings. And the energy of the ocean's tides comes from the gravitational pull of the moon
and the sun upon the Earth.
In fact, ocean energy comes from a number of sources. In addition to tidal energy, there's the
energy of the ocean's waves, which are driven by both the tides and the winds. The sun also
warms the surface of the ocean more than the ocean depths, creating a temperature difference
that can be used as an energy source. All these forms of ocean energy can be used to produce
electricity.
re layers of different materials with different band gaps. The higher band gap material is on the
surface, absorbing high-energy photons while allowing lower-energy photons to be absorbed by
the lower band gap material beneath. This technique can result in much higher efficiencies. Such
cells, called multi-junction cells, can have more than one electric field.
Why is renewable energy important?
Renewable energy is important because of the benefits it provides. The key benefits are:
Environmental benefits -
Renewable energy technologies are clean sources of energy that have a much lower
environmental impact than conventional energy technologies.
Energy for our children's children's children -
Renewable energy will not run out. Ever. Other sources of energy are finite and will some day be
depleted.
Jobs and the economy -
Most renewable energy investments are spent on materials and workmanship to build and
maintain the facilities, rather than on costly energy imports. Renewable energy investments are
usually spent within the United States, frequently in the same state, and often in the same town.
This means your energy dollars stay home to create jobs and fuel local economies, rather than
going overseas. Meanwhile, renewable energy technologies developed and built in the United
States are being sold overseas, providing a boost to the U.S. trade deficit.
Energy security -
After the oil supply disruptions of the early 1970s, our nation has increased its dependence on
foreign oil supplies instead of decreasing it. This increased dependence impacts more than just
our national energy policy.
HOW SOLAR ENERGY IS CAPTURED FOR LIGHTING PRODUCTS
You've probably seen calculators that have solar cells -- calculators that never need batteries,
and in some cases don't even have an off button. As long as you have enough light, they seem to
work forever. You have probably also been hearing about the "solar revolution" for the last 20
years -- the idea that one day we will all use free electricity from the sun. This is a seductive
promise: On a bright, sunny day, the sun shines approximately 1,000 watts of energy per square
meter of the planet's surface, and if we could collect all of that energy we could easily power our
homes and offices for free. But, to start with, solar lighting for around your home and garden
makes great sense as it is so fast and easy to install with no wires and no electricity costs. Its safe,
simple and we have many designs to choose from. For those technically minded or you simply
want to know more about solar energy and how it is created then read on...
Converting Photons to Electrons -
The solar cells that you see on calculators and satellites are photovoltaic cells or modules
(modules are simply a group of cells electrically connected and packaged in one frame).
Photovoltaics, as the word implies (photo = light, voltaic = electricity), convert sunlight directly
into electricity. Once used almost exclusively in space, photovoltaics are used more and more in
less exotic ways. They could even power your house. How do these devices work?
Photovoltaic (PV) cells are made of special materials called semiconductors such as silicon,
which is currently the most commonly used. Basically, when light strikes the cell, a certain portion
of it is absorbed within the semiconductor material. This means that the energy of the absorbed
light is transferred to the semiconductor. The energy knocks electrons loose, allowing them to
flow freely. PV cells also all have one or more electric fields that act to force electrons freed by
light absorption to flow in a certain direction. This flow of electrons is a current, and by placing
metal contacts on the top and bottom of the PV cell, we can draw that current off to use
externally. For example, the current can power a calculator. This current, together with the cell's
voltage (which is a result of its built-in electric field or fields), defines the power (or wattage) that
the solar cell can produce.
That's the basic process, but there's really much more to it. Let's take a deeper look into one
example of a PV cell: the single crystal silicon cell.
Silicon in Solar Cells-
Silicon has some special chemical properties, especially in its crystalline form. An atom of silicon
has 14 electrons, arranged in three different shells. The first two shells, those closest to the center,
are completely full. The outer shell, however, is only half full, having only four electrons. A silicon
atom will always look for ways to fill up its last shell (which would like to have eight electrons).
To do this, it will share electrons with four of its neighbor silicon atoms. It's like every atom holds
hands with its neighbors, except that in this case, each atom has four hands joined to four
neighbors. That's what forms the crystalline structure, and that structure turns out to be important
to this type of PV cell.
We've now described pure, crystalline silicon. Pure silicon is a poor conductor of electricity
because none of its electrons are free to move about, as electrons are in good conductors such as
copper. Instead, the electrons are all locked in the crystalline structure. The silicon in a solar cell
is modified slightly so that it will work as a solar cell.
Our cell has silicon with impurities -- other atoms mixed in with the silicon atoms, changing the
way things work a bit. We usually think of impurities as something undesirable, but in our case,
our cell wouldn't work without them. These impurities are actually put there on purpose. Consider
silicon with an atom of phosphorous here and there, maybe one for every million silicon atoms.
Phosphorous has five electrons in its outer shell, not four. It still bonds with its silicon neighbor
atoms, but in a sense, the phosphorous has one electron that doesn't have anyone to hold hands
with. It doesn't form part of a bond, but there is a positive proton in the phosphorous nucleus
holding it in place.
When energy is added to pure silicon, for example in the form of heat, it can cause a few
electrons to break free of their bonds and leave their atoms. A hole is left behind in each case.
These electrons then wander randomly around the crystalline lattice looking for another hole to
fall into. These electrons are called free carriers, and can carry electrical current. There are so
few of them in pure silicon, however, that they aren't very useful. Our impure silicon with
phosphorous atoms mixed in is a different story. It turns out that it takes a lot less energy to
knock loose one of our "extra" phosphorous electrons because they aren't tied up in a bond --
their neighbors aren't holding them back. As a result, most of these electrons do break free, and
we have a lot more free carriers than we would have in pure silicon. The process of adding
impurities on purpose is called doping, and when doped with phosphorous, the resulting silicon is
called N-type ("n" for negative) because of the prevalence of free electrons. N-type doped silicon
is a much better conductor than pure silicon is.
Actually, only part of our cell is N-type. The other part is doped with boron, which has only three
electrons in its outer shell instead of four, to become P-type silicon. Instead of having free
electrons, P-type silicon ("p" for positive) has free holes. Holes really are just the absence of
electrons, so they carry the opposite (positive) charge. They move around just like electrons do.
So where has all this gotten us? The interesting part starts when you put N-type silicon together
with P-type silicon. Remember that every PV cell has at least one electric field. Without an
electric field, the cell wouldn't work, and this field forms when the N-type and P-type silicon are
in contact. Suddenly, the free electrons in the N side, which have been looking all over for holes
to fall into, see all the free holes on the P side, and there's a mad rush to fill them in.
Before now, our silicon was all electrically neutral. Our extra electrons were balanced out by the
extra protons in the phosphorous. Our missing electrons (holes) were balanced out by the missing
protons in the boron. When the holes and electrons mix at the junction between N-type and
P-type silicon, however, that neutrality is disrupted. Do all the free electrons fill all the free holes?
No. If they did, then the whole arrangement wouldn't be very useful. Right at the junction,
however, they do mix and form a barrier, making it harder and harder for electrons on the N side
to cross to the P side. Eventually, equilibrium is reached, and we have an electric field separating
the two sides.
This electric field acts as a diode, allowing (and even pushing) electrons to flow from the P side to
the N side, but not the other way around. It's like a hill -- electrons can easily go down the hill (to
the N side), but can't climb it (to the P side).
So we've got an electric field acting as a diode in which electrons can only move in one direction.
Let's see what happens when light hits the cell.
When Light Hits the Cell -
When light, in the form of photons, hits our solar cell, its energy frees electron-hole pairs.
Each photon with enough energy will normally free exactly one electron, and result in a free hole
as well. If this happens close enough to the electric field, or if free electron and free hole happen
to wander into its range of influence, the field will send the electron to the N side and the hole to
the P side. This causes further disruption of electrical neutrality, and if we provide an external
current path, electrons will flow through the path to their original side (the P side) to unite with
holes that the electric field sent there, doing work for us along the way. The electron flow
provides the current, and the cell's electric field causes a voltage. With both current and voltage,
we have power, which is the product of the two.
How much sunlight energy does our PV cell absorb? Unfortunately, the most that our simple cell
could absorb is around 25 percent, and more likely is 15 percent or less. Why so little?
Energy Loss -
Why does our solar cell absorb only about 15 percents of the sunlight's energy? Visible light is
only part of the electromagnetic spectrum. Electromagnetic radiation is not monochromatic -- it is
made up of a range of different wavelengths, and therefore energy levels.
Light can be separated into different wavelengths, and we can see them in the form of a rainbow.
Since the light that hits our cell has photons of a wide range of energies, it turns out that some of
them won't have enough energy to form an electron-hole pair. They'll simply pass through the cell
as if it were transparent. Still other photons have too much energy. Only a certain amount of
energy, measured in electron volts (eV) and defined by our cell material (about 1.1 eV for
crystalline silicon), is required to knock an electron loose. We call this the band gap energy of a
material. If a photon has more energy than the required amount, then the extra energy is lost
(unless a photon has twice the required energy, and can create more than one electron-hole pair,
but this effect is not significant). These two effects alone account for the loss of around 70 percent
of the radiation energy incident on our cell.
Why can't we choose a material with a really low band gap, so we can use more of the photons?
Unfortunately, our band gap also determines the strength (voltage) of our electric field, and if it's
too low, then what we make up in extra current (by absorbing more photons), we lose by having
a small voltage. Remember that power is voltage times current. The optimal band gap, balancing
these two effects, is around 1.4 eV for a cell made from a single material.
We have other losses as well. Our electrons have to flow from one side of the cell to the other
through an external circuit. We can cover the bottom with a metal, allowing for good conduction,
but if we completely cover the top, then photons can't get through the opaque conductor and we
lose all of our current (in some cells, transparent conductors are used on the top surface, but not
in all). If we put our contacts only at the sides of our cell, then the electrons have to travel an
extremely long distance (for an electron) to reach the contacts. Remember, silicon is a
semiconductor -- it's not nearly as good as a metal for transporting current. Its internal resistance
(called series resistance) is fairly high, and high resistance means high losses. To minimize these
losses, our cell is covered by a metallic contact grid that shortens the distance that electrons have
to travel while covering only a small part of the cell surface. Even so, some photons are blocked
by the grid, which can't be too small or else its own resistance will be too high.
Finishing the Cell
There are a few more steps left before we can really use our cell. Silicon happens to be a very
shiny material, which means that it is very reflective. Photons that are reflected can't be used by
the cell. For that reason, an antireflective coating is applied to the top of the cell to reduce
reflection losses to less than 5 percent.
The final step is the glass or plastic cover plate that protects the cell from the elements. PV
modules are made by connecting several cells (usually 36) in series and parallel to achieve useful
levels of voltage and current, and putting them in a sturdy frame complete with a glass cover and
positive and negative terminals on the back.
|
 Floating Solar Lights. These versatile solar-powered LED lights are
the ideal decorative compliment to any backyard pond or pool. ...
7550" B&Q Online
www.solarilluminations.com
For pond or swimming pool. Choice of styles and colors. From $14.99
|
||||||||
Web 
