Ex-Premie Forum 7 Archive
From: Sep 29, 2001 To: Oct 04, 2001 Page: 3 of: 5


Jim -:- When do we drop the politics??? -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 12:53:51 (EDT)
__ Vera -:- Re: When do we drop the politics? -:- Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 14:04:48 (EDT)
__ Peter C -:- Hilarious -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 22:19:35 (EDT)
__ __ judge -:- YOU are -:- Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 06:52:09 (EDT)
__ __ Jim -:- Premie, by chance? -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 22:37:28 (EDT)
__ __ Scott T. -:- Very poor taste. -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 22:23:18 (EDT)
__ __ __ Pat:C) -:- This ghost ain't Casper -:- Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 03:52:10 (EDT)
__ Jerry -:- It'll play itself out -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 16:29:59 (EDT)
__ Pat:C) -:- Soon - before Iose all my friends here -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 16:02:40 (EDT)
__ __ Scott T. -:- Before you go. -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 18:56:26 (EDT)
__ __ __ Pat:C) -:- I'll keep in touch via email -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 19:17:37 (EDT)
__ __ Disculta -:- Tarred and feathered -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 18:10:40 (EDT)
__ __ __ Pat:C) -:- male nipples -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 19:19:43 (EDT)
__ __ __ Cynthia -:- To suck on, Silly Girl... -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 19:05:54 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ Disculta -:- Ooohhh! -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 19:35:08 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ Pat:C) -:- Amen, ditto and halleluiah -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 19:21:27 (EDT)
__ Sir Dave -:- Re: When do we drop the politics? -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 15:29:28 (EDT)
__ __ Sir Dave -:- I did that wrong - try again here -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 15:30:35 (EDT)
__ cq -:- Drop politics? Why? -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 14:11:51 (EDT)
__ Timmi -:- Re: When do we drop the politics? -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 13:56:09 (EDT)
__ Rick -:- Re: When do we drop the politics? -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 13:53:51 (EDT)
__ __ berni -:- Re: When do we drop the politics? -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 14:08:25 (EDT)
__ __ __ Rick -:- Re: When do we drop the politics? -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 15:22:56 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ berni -:- Re: When do we drop the politics? -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 15:58:43 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ Rick -:- Re: When do we drop the politics? -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 17:01:21 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ berni -:- thanks, but no thanks -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 17:21:09 (EDT)
__ Peg -:- Does anyone know of any other message board -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 13:52:29 (EDT)
__ __ Barbara -:- The Democratic Underground -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 14:11:31 (EDT)
__ Moley -:- Soon maybe Jim, but before we do - Blair's speech -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 13:41:02 (EDT)
__ __ Jerry -:- Globalization -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 16:51:41 (EDT)
__ __ __ JohnT -:- What's that spell? -:- Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 08:40:03 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ Jerry -:- Proper English -:- Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 10:58:36 (EDT)
__ __ __ Sir Dave }( -:- Globalisation, you misunderstand -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 21:54:06 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ Jerry -:- Re: Globalisation, you misunderstand -:- Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 11:03:18 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Re: Globalisation, you misunderstand -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 22:20:54 (EDT)
__ __ __ Dermot -:- Look here Jerry -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 17:24:09 (EDT)
__ __ Sir Dave -:- The difference between USA and UK -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 13:50:16 (EDT)
__ such -:- Re: When do we drop terrorism cult discussions? -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 13:20:37 (EDT)
__ __ Scott T. -:- Re: When do we drop terrorism cult discussions? -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 15:51:41 (EDT)
__ __ __ such -:- we'll see how it plays out [nt] -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 21:33:41 (EDT)
__ Scott T. -:- Re: When do we drop the politics? -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 13:16:59 (EDT)
__ __ Dermot -:- One last graceless dig huh, Scott ?? -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 16:42:15 (EDT)
__ __ __ Scott T. -:- We're experts in grace now are we? -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 17:31:13 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ Dermot -:- Okay Prig, drop it [nt] -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 17:35:17 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- I beg your pardon? -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 18:26:06 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- He said 'Prig' -:- Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 08:04:38 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Thanks John -:- Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 08:19:07 (EDT)
__ magiclara -:- Re: When do we drop the politics? -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 13:09:24 (EDT)
__ __ Cynthia -:- I'M FOR MAHARAJI -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 13:19:47 (EDT)
__ __ __ Zelda -:- the trouble is- smug premies . -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 15:49:54 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Re: the trouble is- smug premies . -:- Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 01:24:06 (EDT)

Francesca -:- From al Quada moles -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 12:34:43 (EDT)
__ The Lord formerly known as gerry -:- Oh Woe unto your post, Francesca... -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 13:10:40 (EDT)

kYnGlYnG -:- gOrRiLA bReAsT bEaTiNG !!! -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 11:36:18 (EDT)
__ hUNKYmAN -:- At the Feets of the Master -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 11:55:45 (EDT)
__ __ Me Jane -:- Re: At the Feet of the Master -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 12:30:33 (EDT)

suchabanana -:- Elite US units in Afghanistan -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 03:48:01 (EDT)
__ such -:- Let's not forget about Latin America -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 03:53:33 (EDT)
__ __ such -:- or beisbol -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 04:12:28 (EDT)
__ __ __ salam -:- standing room only -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 08:47:24 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ such -:- almost forgot my lecture notes -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 13:15:09 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ btdt -:- Re: almost forgot my lecture notes -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 15:35:05 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Jordan's key role. -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 16:59:26 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ btdt -:- Re: Jordan's key role. -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 19:22:08 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Re: Jordan's key role. -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 20:13:10 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ salam -:- Re: Jordan's key role. -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 20:29:39 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Huh? -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 20:41:59 (EDT)

Jim -:- Would you call THIS anti-American? -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 00:00:33 (EDT)
__ cq -:- Is the Brookings Institute anti-American too? -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 15:54:41 (EDT)
__ __ Jim -:- ANOTHER stupid post! -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 20:19:56 (EDT)
__ __ __ cq -:- Re: ANOTHER stupid post! - you mean your's Jim? -:- Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 08:01:55 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Re: ANOTHER stupid post! - you mean your's Jim? -:- Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 12:22:36 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ cq -:- your methods don't smell too good, Scott -:- Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 15:01:01 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Empty your pants. -:- Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 15:37:26 (EDT)
__ __ Scott T. -:- Guess someone finally used that link. -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 16:03:29 (EDT)
__ salam -:- It depends what anti-american is? -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 07:53:04 (EDT)
__ berni -:- Re: Would you call THIS anti-American? -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 06:08:58 (EDT)
__ __ Jim -:- That's why you're a better person than me -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 14:07:15 (EDT)
__ __ __ bernee -:- No Jim - you're better than me -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 16:29:20 (EDT)
__ Little Mo -:- -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 01:09:39 (EDT)
__ Little Mo -:- -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 01:07:03 (EDT)
__ Francesca -:- It's anti-sensical -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 01:03:00 (EDT)
__ __ Jim -:- Send these gals to Taliban Camp -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 13:51:11 (EDT)
__ __ __ Scott T. -:- She's come a long way, baby. -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 16:10:01 (EDT)
__ __ don -:- Re: It's anti-sensical -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 06:52:52 (EDT)
__ __ Scott T. -:- Re: It's anti-sensical -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 01:54:37 (EDT)

G -:- Taliban torture -:- Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 19:34:30 (EDT)
__ Sir Dave -:- Re: Taliban torture -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 07:21:17 (EDT)

Pat:C) -:- America, curl up and die -:- Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 17:58:11 (EDT)
__ Cynthia -:- Don't You Curl Up and Die! -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 13:10:09 (EDT)
__ __ Dermot -:- you started it all Cynthia, remember??? -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 16:48:18 (EDT)
__ __ __ Cynthia -:- OH! Cut the Shit! -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 19:17:35 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ Dermot -:- It doesn'y surprise me ..ha -:- Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 03:34:55 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Well, I'm going to talk about my feelings... -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 20:58:45 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ Jim -:- How can you possibly say that? -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 20:13:02 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- On Bin Laden's Mom -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 20:39:37 (EDT)
__ __ Carl -:- I think we got it wrong: -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 14:42:13 (EDT)
__ __ __ Dermot -:- Quite impudent of us hey Carl?? -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 16:45:20 (EDT)
__ __ __ Cynthia -:- Re: I think we got it wrong: -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 15:02:44 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ Thelma the Church Ladyb) -:- Re: I think you got it wrong: -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 15:54:44 (EDT)
__ Pat:C) -:- PS Bye, guys, I'm out of here -:- Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 18:32:29 (EDT)
__ __ don -:- Re: PS Bye, guys, I'm out of here -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 06:54:47 (EDT)
__ __ Rick -:- Re: PS Bye, guys, I'm out of here -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 01:15:24 (EDT)
__ __ __ Scott T. -:- I might leave too. -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 02:13:34 (EDT)
__ __ Scott T. -:- Javelinas -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 00:23:56 (EDT)
__ __ salam -:- Re: PS Bye, guys, I'm out of here -:- Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 21:15:47 (EDT)
__ __ __ Bob -:- Re: PS Bye, guys, I'm out of here -:- Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 22:13:17 (EDT)
__ __ Moley -:- Pat - don't go now -:- Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 19:45:08 (EDT)
__ __ __ Pat:C) -:- It's okay for you to say that -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 17:00:30 (EDT)
__ __ bill -:- but what about those of us that love to read you? -:- Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 19:35:15 (EDT)
__ __ __ Jim -:- What in the world is THIS now? -:- Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 20:41:15 (EDT)
__ __ JHB -:- Tantrum number 39? -:- Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 18:35:18 (EDT)
__ __ __ salam -:- Re: Tantrum number 39? -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 08:56:22 (EDT)

salsa -:- I told you so... -:- Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 14:25:11 (EDT)
__ Jim -:- Told us WHAT? -:- Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 20:10:42 (EDT)

Salam -:- Melborne - read this -:- Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 04:29:19 (EDT)
__ CW -:- Re: Melborne - read this -:- Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 11:25:09 (EDT)
__ __ salam -:- very touchy -:- Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 21:42:45 (EDT)
__ __ __ CW -:- Re: very touchy -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 00:02:35 (EDT)
__ __ Sir Dave -:- There is a difference -:- Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 13:06:34 (EDT)
__ __ __ salam -:- get of it -:- Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 21:56:20 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- Six out of ten -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 07:26:46 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ salam -:- I want more -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 08:58:41 (EDT)
__ __ __ CW -:- Re: There is a difference -:- Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 19:02:50 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ CW -:- 10%ers -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 16:56:59 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- Four out of ten -:- Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 07:31:45 (EDT)
__ Mel Bourne -:- Thanks Salam, interesting.....rne - read this -:- Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 04:47:41 (EDT)
__ __ salam -:- Re: Thanks Salam, interesting.....rne - read this -:- Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 21:28:18 (EDT)
__ __ Francesca -:- I don't have the articles ... -:- Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 13:30:24 (EDT)


Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 12:53:51 (EDT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: All
Subject: When do we drop the politics???
Message:
I THINK -- although I'm not exactly sure -- we should drop the politics here and keep the forum focussed on its real subject matter. And I'm not just saying this because I feel that disappointed and exasperated with many of your reactions to the Islamic Fundamentalist attack and what it means about the U.S. I THINK I'd be saying this even if I agreed with most of you, although, to be fair, maybe I wouldn't. In any event, though, we should be mindful of the fact that once we settle into being nothing but the Ex-premie Political Club, we might find it surprisingly hard to get back on track vis-a-vis the purpose of the forum.

Obviously, few of us gave a damn about our old cult leader two weeks ago. Maybe we still don't care about him like we did before September 11. But, if that's the case, it still doesn't mean that we should overwhelm this forum with politics, does it? Perhaps the easy solution would be to either move all the political discussion over to AG or start another simple forum just for Ex-Premie America-bashing (just kidding).

What do you think?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 14:04:48 (EDT)
From: Vera
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Re: When do we drop the politics?
Message:
Yeah, tho my political views are probably different to his, I've been thinking the same as Jim. The political discussion seems to bring out the worst in people - lots of blind anger, litle mutual respect: lots of heat, litte light.

Also the premies may be saying: 'They're all fighting among themselves over there now. Maharaji really knew what he was talking about when he spoke about those rotten vegetables.'

I tend to think unity - hard-won in our case from a shared cult-exit - is more important than political divisions, which are inevitable, and which you can anyway read about anywhere.

Certainly shifting the politics to AG or a dedicated board may be an idea.

My thoughts anyway.

Vera

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 22:19:35 (EDT)
From: Peter C
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Hilarious
Message:
Hey Jim.... miss the bashing.... Uh?

I can hear you thinking.... 'what is going on, before Sept 11 I was the leader of this board, setting the pace, driving it, being adored by the ex-premie masses... and now, who the fuck is this Bin Laden to steal my glory.... I want it to go back to the pre Sept 11. I want and crave my position. Fuck this bin laden business. Who cares!'

... What a pathetic asshole!

PC

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 06:52:09 (EDT)
From: judge
Email: None
To: Peter C
Subject: YOU are
Message:
And you thought you have something to say and that it sounded good. My gosh, premie/lovers: hahahhahahahhahaa. Try ignoramus.

Did you give blood? Do you have blood? Are you still human? I doubt it. Cult members are strange beings and you are the proof.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 22:37:28 (EDT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Peter C
Subject: Premie, by chance?
Message:
You might not be a premie but then again ... are you?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 22:23:18 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Peter C
Subject: Very poor taste.
Message:
You must be a real blessing to your mother.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 03:52:10 (EDT)
From: Pat:C)
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: This ghost ain't Casper
Message:
Probably another shrivelled, misanthropic cultweasel.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 16:29:59 (EDT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: It'll play itself out
Message:
Just like the presidential election did. When the topic's no longer interesting, people will let go of it.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 16:02:40 (EDT)
From: Pat:C)
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Soon - before Iose all my friends here
Message:
and am tarred and feathered. Take the major OT stuff to AG.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 18:56:26 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: freewheeling@bigfoot.com
To: Pat:C)
Subject: Before you go.
Message:
Let me know where your restaurant is located, in case I get to SF and want to hook up with another politically incorrect white supremacist bitch magnet for conversation and some good food. Just email me.

--Scott (Just kidding about the bitch magnet stuff. Well, not really but it's a long story. Let's see...) T.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 19:17:37 (EDT)
From: Pat:C)
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: I'll keep in touch via email
Message:
We can plot about old fogies taking over the world. It's a pity they didn't freeze-dry Churchill though. The last Brit pol I liked. Well, he was half-yank.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 18:10:40 (EDT)
From: Disculta
Email: None
To: Pat:C)
Subject: Tarred and feathered
Message:
It made me laugh to think of you this way. Would it make a good 'pat du jour?'

Jeez! Okay:

Q: What is the purpose of male nipples?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 19:19:43 (EDT)
From: Pat:C)
Email: None
To: Disculta
Subject: male nipples
Message:
You said: ''Q: What is the purpose of male nipples?''

You mean your man hasn't shown you yet?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 19:05:54 (EDT)
From: Cynthia
Email: None
To: Disculta
Subject: To suck on, Silly Girl...
Message:
...but of course you know that!

I'm sick of politics because I feel powerless and words on a forum don't give me any real power.

I'd rather suck on male nipples!

Love,
Cynthia

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 19:35:08 (EDT)
From: Disculta
Email: None
To: Cynthia
Subject: Ooohhh!
Message:
I guess that makes them A DECOY FOR OTHER NIPPLES!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 19:21:27 (EDT)
From: Pat:C)
Email: None
To: Cynthia
Subject: Amen, ditto and halleluiah
Message:
...but of course you know that!

I'm sick of politics because I feel powerless and words on a forum don't give me any real power.

I'd rather suck on male nipples!

Love,
Cynthia


---

That's not all that male nipples are good for.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 15:29:28 (EDT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Re: When do we drop the politics?
Message:
I found this site while surfing the net. Looks like it could do with some use.
[ Page Link ]
[ Graphic Link ]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 15:30:35 (EDT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: I did that wrong - try again here
Message:

[ The War Room ]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 14:11:51 (EDT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Drop politics? Why?
Message:
Ever since the forum separated from EPO, this place has been simply somewhere where (mostly) exes and the occasional premie can talk about whatever they want to. Constant focus on the Maha is no longer obligatory.

I think a much healthier atmosphere exists on forums where the topic is not restricted to any one particular subject. They're certainly much more entertaining.

As long as threads which are about the Maha are clearly evident/marked, then those who ONLY want to discuss him and his organisation can simply ignore all the other threads.

I'll put money where my mouth is too, and willingly donate towards the cost of such a forum.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 13:56:09 (EDT)
From: Timmi
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Re: When do we drop the politics?
Message:
I think a nerve was struck that maybe many people didn't realize, or didn't want to think about. bin Laden is obviously capable of the same kind of mind-takeover that rawat is. And, probably, they use some of the same techniques to do it. (Not techniques of 'knowledge', but of mind control.) This is not meant to keep the political discussion alive, but rather to suggest that the realization of how bin Laden was able to control these people's minds is a very frightening thing to people's whose minds have been controlled by another. I hear rawat say all the time in videos, tapes and broadcasts, words designed to make the premies feel and believe that they cannot survive without him. And from where I am, the premies accept that and believe it. I have heard some of them say, 'Without Maharaji, I couldn't survive.' That is a direct quote. It sickens me to see someone so crippled by another's abuse of and hunger for power and control. Rawat doesn't care at all for these people. Only in as far as they keep him supplied with money and adoration, is he concerned. Beyond that, the premies are nothing to him. If the $25,000,000 residence, the $45,000,000 jet, the $7,000,000 yacht and whatever else he has were to vanish, what would he do? I would issue a challenge to rawat. If what he offers truly will bring happiness and everything else doesn't matter, give all that stuff away. Go get an adequate apartment or house, buy a regular car and fly commercial. According to his own teachings, he should be equally happy in those circumstances. Well, rawat? How about it? Are you telling premies the truth about knowledge? Or is it all a bunch a crap? Most of us know the truth already.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 13:53:51 (EDT)
From: Rick
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Re: When do we drop the politics?
Message:
I think our discussion of politics this last couple of weeks is a big slap in the face to maharaji. As a wrinkle in time, it was whip cream on top of the cake. Not only is maharaji rotten, he just happens to be very insignificant in the larger scope of things.

The politics will die down of their own accord, just like every other time. And juicy stuff about the guru will re-surface, just like every other time. I don't see any thing to worry about.

I also think the occasional periods of political discussion point to just how healthy it is to be free from a spiritual guru.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 14:08:25 (EDT)
From: berni
Email: bernee@flashmail.com
To: Rick
Subject: Re: When do we drop the politics?
Message:
I agree Rick,
And what should be the real subject matter of the forum?
If it is just Maharaji bashing - then isn't the present world situation much more important.
I remember becoming really bored with the subject of knowledge and Maharaji - and still am. I know that this forum provides a good service to those who need support leaving the cult and those who are contemplating joining it, but that all seems like small potatoes next to what's going on.
Also, in this case, doesn't the war against terrorism also means a war against religious fundamentalism and there's shome relation shirley.
And Jim, did you read my last post below regarding the suffering of strangers?
berni
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 15:22:56 (EDT)
From: Rick
Email: None
To: berni
Subject: Re: When do we drop the politics?
Message:
Hi berni,
It's very interesing how lively the debate is here. Maybe it just seems that way because I'm finding others that agree with me.

Also, it's interesting how the premies can hardly discuss anything on their own forums. They aren't just unable to think when it comes to maharaji; they seem unable to think about anything.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 15:58:43 (EDT)
From: berni
Email: None
To: Rick
Subject: Re: When do we drop the politics?
Message:
Hi Rick,
re:it's interesting how the premies can hardly discuss anything on their own forums. They aren't just unable to think when it comes to maharaji; they seem unable to think about anything.

c'mon now, I can't help finding this amusing but naughty. Some of my best friends are still premies and we were once the same - oh no did I just say that?
I, of course was always the level headed, reasonable premie that never tried to persuade anyone else that I'd found the answer to all life's problems and that if they didn't join me in my view of life, they were missing out on the TRUTH, and they would NEVER FIND TRUE FULFILLMENT because everything was based on the DIVINE LOGIC the secret of which was bestowed by the LIVING PERFECT MASTER..... oops I must have relapsed there for a minute.
O.k. maybe I did prosletize a bit after the odd rabble rousing satsang
But that was then....
cheers
berni

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 17:01:21 (EDT)
From: Rick
Email: None
To: berni
Subject: Re: When do we drop the politics?
Message:
berni,
Have you been over to any of the premie forums? They aren't discussing the politics of late, so it's hard not to think the programming doesn't have something to do with it.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 17:21:09 (EDT)
From: berni
Email: None
To: Rick
Subject: thanks, but no thanks
Message:
Hi Rick,
I have had enough of the premie world - since long ago.
Although I have been known to have a quick look on occassion - I just couldn't at the moment.
It's interesting that you say those sites are not as active as the rest of the world. Just about every other forum on the internet from gardening to astro-physics are talking about the horrific event of September 11th - trying and make sense of it and wondering about what is to happen as a result. Everyone, like us, compelled to add their meagre opinions to the debate, no matter how powerless.
Premies are probably too busy meditating - and who could blame them?
berni
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 13:52:29 (EDT)
From: Peg
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Does anyone know of any other message board
Message:
Where politics is discussed? This could be published here and whoever was interested could visit.
If there was there would probably be a load more info and slants for those who want to carry on. I haven't found anything myself that's as lively as this but I'm not that good at looking.

Peg

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 14:11:31 (EDT)
From: Barbara
Email: None
To: Peg
Subject: The Democratic Underground
Message:
Peg:

Here's a link to the Democratic Underground. This link is to the main page, and on the home page is a link to their forums (fori?). When you go to their list of forums, the second one down is for sole discussion of the 9/11 attacks.

B.
[ Democratic Underground ]

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 13:41:02 (EDT)
From: Moley
Email: moldy_warp@hotmail.com
To: Jim
Subject: Soon maybe Jim, but before we do - Blair's speech
Message:
I just saw Tony Blair's speech at the Labour Party conference this afternoon.I found it inspiring as he managed to somehow steer a path between views such as yours and views such as mine. He said some things that I think would hearten you, and some stuff that heartened me too.

He gave a very moving account of his meeting with some of the relatives of the dead, and how they did not want revenge, but justice.

He promised to stand by America until the end of the business, telling the Taliban that they would have to hand over Bin Laden or relinquish power. There was some analysis afterwards as to whether or not he was giving them one more chance. Of course, if they don't, it means he is committed to a bringing down the regime.

He spoke movingly about how America had made mistakes in the past, as had Britain, but that was no excuse for an 'I told you so' attitude that a few party members seemed to hold. (though I don't think any forum folk think that way at all BTW)

He talked of the best memorial to the dead being an attempt to find a way out of the mess of inequality and global conflict. Globilisation being a fact, and not a dirty word, we need to use it for good, not be isolationist, but see our interdependence.
He used the analogy of a kaleidescope - Sept. 11th shook up the pieces and before they settle again, we should seize the opportunity to change things for the better, to address the huge inequalities in the world. (something like half a million Afghan children never reach their fifth birthday).

All people are equal ... America stands for freedom, we need to bring freedom from oppression to all the peoples of the world... Muslim people are our brothers and sisters... if Rwanda was happening now, we would have a moral duty to go in there.

Heartening stuff - pro America, and no Us v Them mentality either.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 16:51:41 (EDT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Moley
Subject: Globalization
Message:
Globilisation being a fact, and not a dirty word, we need to use it for good, not be isolationist, but see our interdependence.

Globalization has been and will continue to be used for one thing only.

Profit.

You live in the same dream world Scott does, that we're in the business of exporting our brilliant ideology of freedom and democracy. Our leaders have no such interest at heart. Making the almighty dollar is what globalization is about. And that means exploitation.

Let's be real, okay?

And how come you Brits nver learned how to spell? It's Globalization, with a 'z', not an 's'.

Sheesh!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 08:40:03 (EDT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: What's that spell?
Message:

G H O T I

FISH!

GH as in rough
O as in women
TI as in attention

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 10:58:36 (EDT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: Proper English
Message:
Sally Salter, she was a young teacher who taught,
And her friend, Charley Church, was a preacher who praught;
Though his enemies called him a screecher, who scraught.

His heart, when he saw her, kept sinking, and sunk;
And his eye, meeting hers, began winking, and wunk;
While she in her turn, fell to thinking, and thunk.

In secret he wanted to speak, and he spoke,
To seek with his lips what his heart long had soke,
So he managed to let the truth leak, and it loke.

The kiss he was dying to steal, then he stole;
At the feet where he wanted to kneel, then he knole;
And he said, 'I feel better than I ever fole.'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 21:54:06 (EDT)
From: Sir Dave }(
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: Globalisation, you misunderstand
Message:
Listen to Tony Blair's speech of yesterday before passing such comments. He was talking about globalisation that is already happening and is inevitable. Globalisation in order to rid the world of the terrible atrocities that happen in Africa, Asia and Europe, as well as America.

Condemning globalisation is like condemning alliances between different States in the US. Would it be sensible to keep everything seperate in each state? If the state of NY had not called upon help from all over America since September 11th, would that not have been ridiculous?

Countries throughout the world are becoming less insular, less seperate and less able to define their borders in terms of catastrophes which threaten the world. Global warming, if it exists is a global problem. So too is the threat of terrorism. While only the US has helped with Britain's Northern Irish problem, it does indicate that countries should not be seperate and that global co-operation is the way to go.

You should be pleased - President Gearge W Bush does not agree with Tony Blair's vision of globalisation. Listen to Blair's speech and you'll see why.

By the way, it is globalisation of ex-premies, through the internet, that has caused such a problem for Maharaji.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 11:03:18 (EDT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Sir Dave }(
Subject: Re: Globalisation, you misunderstand
Message:
Listen to Tony Blair's speech of yesterday before passing such comments.

You got a link? I can't find it.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 22:20:54 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Sir Dave }(
Subject: Re: Globalisation, you misunderstand
Message:
Dave:

Good explanation. Thanks.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 17:24:09 (EDT)
From: Dermot
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: Look here Jerry
Message:
Go get your own language .....leave our English alone :)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 13:50:16 (EDT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Moley
Subject: The difference between USA and UK
Message:
From Sky News:

He (Tony Blair) addressed Dennis Skinner's claims he was riding on George W Bush's ''coat tails'' by calling for a wider effort to ''re-order the world'', including giving Palestinians a ''land of their own'', and critising elements of US foreign policy, such as on climate change.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 13:20:37 (EDT)
From: such
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Re: When do we drop terrorism cult discussions?
Message:
For those who can stomach the reality... another perspective:

From: Dr. Tony Kern, Lt Col, USAF (Ret)

Recently, I was asked to look at the recent events through the lens of
military history.  I have joined the cast of thousands who have written an
'open letter to Americans.'
Dear friends and fellow Americans                
14 September, 2001
Like everyone else in this great country, I am reeling from last week's
attack on our sovereignty. But unlike some, I am not reeling from surprise.
As a career soldier and a student and teacher of military history, I have a
different perspective and I think you should hear it. This war will be won
or
lost by the American citizens, not diplomats, politicians or soldiers.

Let me briefly explain.

In spite of what the media, and even our own government is telling us, this
act was not committed by a group of mentally deranged fanatics. To dismiss
them as such would be among the gravest of mistakes. This attack was
committed by a ferocious, intelligent and dedicated adversary. Don't take
this the wrong way. I don't admire these men and I deplore their tactics,
but
I respect their capabilities. The many parallels that have been made
with the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor are apropos. Not only because it
was
a brilliant sneak attack against a complacent America, but also because we
may well be pulling our new adversaries out of caves 30 years after we
think this war is over, just like my father's generation had to do with the
formidable Japanese in the years following WW II.

These men hate the United States with all of their being, and we must not
underestimate the power of their moral commitment. Napoleon, perhaps the
world's greatest combination of soldier and statesman, stated 'the moral is
to the physical as three is to one.' Patton thought the Frenchman
underestimated its importance and said moral conviction was five times more
important in battle than physical strength. Our enemies are willing - better
said anxious -- to give their lives for their cause.

How committed are we America? And for how long?

In addition to demonstrating great moral conviction, the recent attack
demonstrated a mastery of some of the basic fundamentals of warfare taught
to
most military officers worldwide, namely simplicity, security and
surprise. When I first heard rumors that some of these men may have been
trained at our own Air War College, it made perfect sense to me. This was
not
a random act of violence, and we can expect the same sort of military
competence to be displayed in the battle to come.

This war will escalate, with a good portion of it happening right here in
the
good ol' U.S. of A.

These men will not go easily into the night. They do not fear us. We must
not
fear them. In spite of our overwhelming conventional strength as the
world's only 'superpower' (a truly silly term), we are the underdog in this
fight. As you listen to the carefully scripted rhetoric designed to prepare
us for the march for war, please realize that America is not equipped or
seriously trained for the battle ahead. To be certain, our soldiers are much

better than the enemy, and we have some excellent 'counter-terrorist'
organizations, but they are mostly trained for hostage rescues, airfield
seizures, or the occasional 'body snatch,' (which may come in handy). We
will
be fighting a war of annihilation, because if their early efforts are any
indication, our enemy is ready and willing to die to the last man.
Eradicating the enemy will be costly and time consuming. They have already
deployed their forces in as many as 20 countries, and are likely living the
lives of everyday citizens. Simply put, our soldiers will be tasked with a
search and destroy mission on multiple foreign landscapes, and the public
must be patient and supportive until the strategy and tactics can be worked
out.

For the most part, our military is still in the process of redefining itself

and presided over by men and women who grew up with - and were promoted
because they excelled in - Cold War doctrine, strategy and tactics. This
will not be linear warfare, there will be no clear 'centers of gravity' to
strike with high technology weapons. Our vast technological edge will
certainly be helpful, but it will not be decisive. Perhaps the perfect
metaphor for the coming battle was introduced by the terrorists themselves
aboard the hijacked aircraft -- this will be a knife fight, and it will be
won or lost by the ingenuity and will of citizens and soldiers, not by
software or smart bombs. We must also be patient with our military leaders.

Unlike Americans who are eager to put this messy time behind us, our
adversaries have time on their side, and they will use it. They plan to
fight
a battle of attrition, hoping to drag the battle out until the American
public loses its will to fight. This might be difficult to believe
in this euphoric time of flag waving and patriotism, but it is generally
acknowledged that America lacks the stomach for a long fight. We need only
look as far back as Vietnam, when North Vietnamese General Vo Nguyen Giap 
(also a military history teacher) defeated the United States of America
without ever winning a major tactical battle. American soldiers who marched
to war cheered on by flag waving Americans in 1965 were reviled and spat
upon less than three years later when they returned. Although we hope that
Usama Bin Laden is no Giap, he is certain to understand and employ the
concept. We can expect not only large doses of pain like the recent attacks,
but! also less audacious 'sand in the gears' tactics, ranging from livestock

infestations to attacks at water supplies and power distribution facilities.

These attacks are designed to hit us in our 'comfort zone' forcing the
average American to 'pay more and play less' and eventually eroding our
resolve. But it can only work if we let it. It is clear to me that the will
of the American citizenry - you and I - is the center of gravity the enemy
has targeted. It will be the fulcrum upon which victory or defeat will turn.

He believes us to be soft, impatient, and self-centered. He may be right,
but
if so, we must change. The Prussian general Carl von Clausewitz, (the
most often quoted and least read military theorist in history), says that
there is a 'remarkable trinity of war' that is composed of the
(1) will of the people,
(2) the political leadership of the government, and
(3) the chance and probability that plays out on the field of battle, in
that
order.
Every American citizen was in the crosshairs of last Tuesday's attack, not
just those that were unfortunate enough to be in the World Trade Center or
Pentagon. The will of the American people will decide this war. If we are to

win, it will be because we have what it takes to persevere through a few
more
hits, learn from our! mistakes, improvise, and adapt. If we can do
that, we will eventually prevail.

Everyone I've talked to In the past few days has shared a common
frustration,
saying in one form or another 'I just wish I could do something!' You are
already doing it. Just keep faith in America, and continue to support your
President and military, and the outcome is certain.

If we fail to do so, the outcome is equally certain.

God Bless America

Dr. Tony Kern, Lt Col, USAF (Ret)
Former Director of Military History, USAF Academy

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 15:51:41 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: such
Subject: Re: When do we drop terrorism cult discussions?
Message:
Such:

I'm not sure I agree that el Quaeda are as formidable as he suggests, but agree with the rest of it. According to the testemony of the Physician who was held as a material witness (and completely cleared) some of the people held as terrorists with him (those two who were nabbed on the Amtrak in Texas) were doing a lot of crying and whining. Cult thinking creates this veneer of magical thinking that acts as a buffer from the real world, but when the buffer is removed the seeming toughness evaporates. And it's not the big things but the minor inconveniences that erode that veneer, because the cult is all... big picture. What do you think?

--Scott
[ Scott T. ]

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 21:33:41 (EDT)
From: such
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: we'll see how it plays out [nt]
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 13:16:59 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Re: When do we drop the politics?
Message:
Jim:

There's a natural connection between the two topics, though we don't seem inclined to move in that direction. Many of the exes and premies seem to see this as a political issue motivated by genuine concerns about US objectives and practices. I think that's preposterous, but as you say it's clearly off topic anyway. The basic issue is the extent to which cultic practices are behind the actions, and the role that plays in turning common resentments, frusrations and envies into murderous and suicidal actions.

I submit that we know more about this than the general public, but not really enough to be comfortable with the topic. Anyway, I've done about all I indend to do in addressing what I feel are ill-informed and ill-considered opinions. I think I can be more effective using my skills and knowledge elsewhere, and I have a living to make. So, I think along with Pat I'm leaving the field to Rick, Dermot and the legion of ghost personalities claiming personal offenses based on vague disinformation. I just want to warn them about that large receptacle waiting for 'history's discarded lies.' They bear at least some responsibility for their own marginalization.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 16:42:15 (EDT)
From: Dermot
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: One last graceless dig huh, Scott ??
Message:
Hard to resist though I suppose from a man of stature such as your good self. After all, you've skills and expertise sorley needed in more exalted company.

I respected those of you who held opposite views and respected your right to hold them. I also interpreted Jims post as a concilliatory gesture. Sort of like, yeah we've split camp here but regardless of politics we have other stuff in common. Notwithstanding his usual, ultimately inoffensive jibe about always being right.

Not so for you though Scott huh?

I read you wrong, I guess.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 17:31:13 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Dermot
Subject: We're experts in grace now are we?
Message:
Dermot:

Jim, concilliatory? Ohhkaay. So, your claim is that the majority opinion on the forum *isn't* marginal in the larger society, and they aren't placing the values they link to it in the same marginal basket? Anti-terrorism, anti-racism, anti-war all wound up in the same tight insightful little ball, right? Well, if you say so.

And I do think I can do more elsewhere. As does Pat, apparently. We sure aren't doing much here. You seem to think Vera's got a point even though she/he/it has been openly manipulative and deliberately misleading (as well as wildly inaccurate), so I figure that if her little game isn't transparent enough for you I'm just wasting time. I don't know what else to think. Further debate sure isn't getting *us* anywhere. On the other hand Jim's phenomenal political sensitivity has always been lurking there, just under the surface. I'm really gratified to see that it's finally broken free and has begun to flower.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 17:35:17 (EDT)
From: Dermot
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: Okay Prig, drop it [nt]
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 18:26:06 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Dermot
Subject: I beg your pardon?
Message:
You propose that the US had some role to play in provoking the deaths of 7,000 people; claim it was just some innocuous error in 'manners' equivalent to using a butter knife to slice the bread, and then chide me for being 'graceless' when I figure you and your 'friends' to be rigid and unyielding in their largely unsubstantiated views. I think you're more open, and probably more graceful, than Rick and some of the others so I'll apologize for including you with them. And I'll drop it, but I'm not likely to forget it. In my estimation you still owe an apology or two yourself, and not over some slight miscalculation in manners.

-Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 08:04:38 (EDT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: He said 'Prig'
Message:
It's a simple enough point, even for a cultist.

If I walk alone through a tough neighbourhood at night laden with jewels and gold and I am mugged, the fact that I stupidly advertised my wealth and vulnerability does not justify a robbery against me.

If my friends say to me 'You should have hidden your gold chains, then perhaps you would not have been attacked.' that does not justify the robbery either.

If they say 'There are people in that neighbourhood who have been beaten savagely by their parents and siblings. They were not helped by their schools and cannot find work. Now they are ignorant and violent, strung out on crack, and desparate for cash. Why did you walk alone at night through those streets, festooned with your wealth?'

If they say that, should I then reply 'how dare you justify the attack. Nothing can justify a mugging!'


---

---

---
--

That's not supposed to be a metaphore or analogy for recent events. It is merely to make a very obvious point. To understand does not mean to justify.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 08:19:07 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: Thanks John
Message:
I really had no idea what the word meant until you defined it. So just to clarify, when you say that the attack on the WTC was *motivated* by our selfish godless pursuit of wealth you're not *justifying* the attack, just *understanding* it. Oh, I see. My mistake.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 13:09:24 (EDT)
From: magiclara
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Re: When do we drop the politics?
Message:
I agree totally. I think it was helpful following the attack but I am not sure it is now. If people want to carry on discussing politics perhaps there could be another forum with an appropriate title. As this is called Ex premie forum I suspect Rawat, EV and LG forum participants must be really pleased to see that maha is not being discussed.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 13:19:47 (EDT)
From: Cynthia
Email: None
To: magiclara
Subject: I'M FOR MAHARAJI
Message:
Get your attention?

Let's talk about Maharaji. I wonder if he donated any money to anything.

Magiclara, you're right about the EV monitors, they've probably been slacking off, too!

And Jim, I think the current political situation has been talked to death here. New stuff will happen probably, but I'm tired of reading it. I'm rationing my intake of pundit lately.

Anyway. Any gossip about Maharaji? If he does go to Amaroo this December for his birthday, he'll probably start a new tunnel project that leads into his underground residence...AND he likes hot weather.

Cynthia

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 15:49:54 (EDT)
From: Zelda
Email: None
To: Cynthia
Subject: the trouble is- smug premies .
Message:
the world events have the premies in deep denial of their co-dependance on jumanji. a 'nothing to do with me' attitude which smugly implies a escape route via the Speaker.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 01:24:06 (EDT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Zelda
Subject: Re: the trouble is- smug premies .
Message:
You're right, Zelda ... it's deadsville over at Life's-not-Great- until-we-receve-rawat's-grace-to-ignore-reality-again.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 12:34:43 (EDT)
From: Francesca
Email: None
To: All
Subject: From al Quada moles
Message:
This is from the LA Times, Sept 24 2001

THE TERROR NETWORK

Life Inside Al Qaeda: A Destructive Devotion
By MARK FINEMAN and STEPHEN BRAUN
TIMES STAFF WRITERS

September 24 2001

NEW YORK -- The soldiers of Al Qaeda move seamlessly from nation to nation, continent to continent, changing names, passports, entire identities time and again.

Osama bin Laden's men shed their devout sacraments to elude detection, shaving beards in secular lands and carrying duty-free cigarettes and cologne to throw profiling border agents off the scent.

Some work in dead-end covers as fishermen, grocers or burger flippers, while others carry suitcases bulging with down payments for Kalashnikov rifles, night scopes, Stinger antiaircraft missiles, enriched weapons-grade uranium. Their commitment is unyielding. They film their own suicide videos before they hop into Toyota pickup trucks loaded with hundreds of pounds of TNT, turn on audio cassettes chanting praise to those who will die for the cause, and blow themselves to bits to weaken the social foundation of their worst enemy: the United States.

The profile of Al Qaeda, Arabic for 'the Base,' unreels in recorded testimony tucked away in the federal courthouse here in lower Manhattan. Largely unnoticed by the public at the time, a trial that ended in May generated insights into the terrorist organization that ultimately would be linked to the deadly attacks on the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon.

A jury found four Al Qaeda members guilty of staging the August 1998 suicide bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania that killed 224 people.

Bin Laden himself was charged in the 308-count indictment as the leader of the conspiracy to kill U.S. nationals in Africa and for exhorting his Al Qaeda followers to murder. A $5-million reward was offered for information leading to his arrest.

The Al Qaeda depicted in the 76-day trial is capable of relentless, selfless efficiency and, at the same time, amateurish dysfunction. The same secret organization that succeeded in demolishing two embassies in two different lands almost simultaneously was also prone to petty feuds and embezzlement, capable of losing hundreds of thousands of dollars in scams and bad business decisions.

But it also is an Al Qaeda of mind-boggling commitment.

'What makes his group different from [covert groups] we've seen before--the Russian and German spying operations in the Cold War, the killers in Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah--is that so many of them are willing to die,' said Robert M. Bryant, former deputy director of the FBI.

For David P. Baugh, who defended Mohamed Rashed Daoud al-'Owhali--a would-be suicide bomber who survived the embassy blast in Nairobi, Kenya--the testimony is woven with clues to some of America's most asked questions today.

'The issue is: Why is this happening? Why do they hate us?' Baugh said in an interview last week.

Some answers came through testimony about Al-'Owhali, a young Saudi who told an FBI interrogator why he so wished to die for Al Qaeda. Other answers came from Jamal Ahmed al-Fadl, a Sudanese nearly twice the age of the Saudi. Al-Fadl had defected from Al Qaeda with many secrets. His testimony formed an operative flow chart of Al Qaeda for U.S. counter-terrorism officials.

The older man was well-acquainted with Al Qaeda's inner roots; the younger man stood as testimony to its bitter fruit.

Dubbed 'Confidential Source One'

Al-Fadl knows more about Al Qaeda than most. He was there when the group was formed in 1989 by Bin Laden and a group of like-minded moujahedeen freedom fighters, the CIA-backed Islamic guerrillas who ground down the Soviet army in Afghanistan and drove it into retreat.

At age 38, Al-Fadl ultimately would give U.S. intelligence agents and prosecutors their first--and perhaps best--blueprint of Al Qaeda: its origins, its structure, its modus operandi and its petty human failings.

Al-Fadl offered little evidence against the defendants in the embassy bombing trial. His testimony was aimed squarely at Bin Laden, buttressed by similar accounts by two other Al Qaeda defectors and by terror mission documents left on computer disks seized by FBI agents in Nairobi after the blasts.

For America, Al-Fadl was a gem, a secret federal witness known for five years only as CS-1, 'Confidential Source One.'

When he was finally unveiled, tanned and wearing an Islamic skullcap on the witness stand in the embassy bombing trial in February, Judge Leonard Sand granted prosecutors' requests that courtroom artists not sketch him. Federal marshals checked the artists' bags each day before they left to make sure.

Al-Fadl sketched his own early life as that of a drifter. From his small hometown of Ruffa in Sudan, he went to Saudi Arabia. He was deported in 1981 after he was arrested for smoking marijuana. He headed to Atlanta, North Carolina then Brooklyn, where he worked as a grocer.

But in New York, he found religion at the Farouq Mosque, where Emir Mustafa Shalabi was urging all Muslims--young, strong, male and able--to head to Afghanistan and fight the Soviet infidels who had invaded in 1979. It was a holy call to arms that would become Bin Laden's fertile recruiting ground.

'We have to make jihad out of them. . . . You have to follow the rule of the emir,' Al-Fadl recalled.

The siren song echoed in mosques around the globe. Fellow Muslims were under attack. Islam was perceived in danger.

So, like thousands of others in the years to come, Al-Fadl left in 1988 for Peshawar, the dusty and destitute Pakistani border town that was home to hundreds of thousands of Afghan refugees. It was the launch pad for the jihad, or holy war.

There, at gritty guerrilla training centers that often doubled as refugee camps, he learned to fire a Russian-made Kalashnikov rifle, to hit helicopters with rocket-propelled grenades and to slip in and out of identities. His friends there knew him only as 'the Sudanese.'

As the days passed, Al-Fadl told the jury, as his fervor was honed, he came to 'follow the rule' of a new emir.

Al-Fadl said he met often with Bin Laden, the ascetic Saudi exile, in Peshawar's cramped guest house chambers and gardens. Often, they spoke in veiled terms about the overarching reach of jihad.

It was in 1989, Al-Fadl recalled, in an explosives-training camp in the battle-scarred Afghan town of Khost, that he learned of Al Qaeda's birth. The group's 'general emir' was Bin Laden. And when asked whether he wanted to be one of the founding members, Al-Fadl readily agreed.

He was handed a document by an Al Qaeda commander. 'I read it,' Al-Fadl testified, 'and after that, I swear in front of him and I sign the papers.'

It was an oath of allegiance to Bin Laden and his lieutenants. Called the bayat, the basic and once-secret rite of Al Qaeda endures through today. It is not unlike the omerta oath taken by members of the Mafia, which President Bush has compared to Al Qaeda.

Bin Laden, whose father bequeathed to him part of a corporate empire in Saudi Arabia, structured 'the Base' as a cost- and personnel-efficient terrorist conglomerate.

At the top, Al-Fadl explained, is the 'shura council,' veteran clerics and military leaders from Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Yemen and other nations--all freedom fighters who have proved themselves in jihad.

The council is divided into four committees, Al-Fadl said. A military group is headed by field commanders. There's a group of mullahs and religious clerics who mesh Islam with Bin Laden's jihad battle plan. There's even a media group that handles Al Qaeda's public relations. Al-Fadl said he became a key player in the fourth committee: finance, the trusted aides who would buy farms and other businesses to give cover for Bin Laden's terror operations.

As for recruits to this new holy army, Al-Fadl said, the brutality of the Soviet occupation, the Persian Gulf War's Muslim casualties and oppressive Arab and African regimes took care of that.

Along with their weapons training, they learned to cluster in small cells, operate on scant bits of command information, hew to the discipline of silence. And, always, Al Qaeda's moles followed Bin Laden's exhortation 'to be patient.'

Thousands of motivated, rootless young Muslims from Manila to Mecca, Jakarta to Jidda, Bosnia to Brooklyn flocked to Al Qaeda's core. And as the bayats stacked up, Bin Laden's commanders enforced a strict regimen: All recruits would live furtively, slip in and out of their enemy's lands like ghosts.

'You need to be a normal person,' Al-Fadl was told by one commander. 'If you go with beard and Islamic dress, the intelligence officer [in target countries] . . . want to ask a lot of questions.'

Leave the Koran and prayer books behind, Al Qaeda's men were told. On a trip to Egypt, Al-Fadl got the standard line from his commander, Abu Talal al Masry: Buy cologne and cigarettes.

'He [would] say if somebody in customs' sees the cologne and cigarettes, 'he is not going to think you in Islamic group or anything like,' Al-Fadl testified. The cologne, he added, would make them think 'I like smelling' good for women.

Al Qaeda also began acquiring ventures, mimicking Western corporations. Al-Fadl bought farms, one for $250,000 to grow sesame, peanuts and corn in the Sudanese countryside. He sent the crops to Afghanistan in planes that returned with British and American-made night goggles, rifle scopes and other advanced military gear, he said.

The origin of the money was unclear. Some came from Bin Laden's personal bank account in Khartoum, Sudan, Al-Fadl testified. Other Al Qaeda leaders had accounts in banks in Malaysia, Hong Kong and Dubai, and one patronized Barclays Bank in London. There were hundreds of thousands in donations to the jihad too, from the Arab world--religious corporate sheiks and fundamentalist governments.

Bin Laden told Al-Fadl: 'Our agenda is bigger than business.' The companies were fronts for the terror cells and cash cows for future operations. Al-Fadl was given several units to run.

Soon, the jihad found its natural enemy--America's huge Gulf War military presence in Saudi Arabia. Bin Laden and his clerics expanded their target list in 1992 as the U.S. sent peacekeeping troops to Somalia. All Americans, even civilians, were now at risk. Jihad warriors no longer 'had to worry' about distinctions, one cleric told Al-Fadl. Bin Laden was even blunter a few days later. 'The snake is America,' he told Al-Fadl and other disciples, 'and we have to stop them. We have to cut the head of the snake.'

Bin Laden's commanders were already ordering arms: Stinger-missile shipments. Anti-tank rockets. A plane.

Cash flowed freely for bigger and bigger equipment. Bin Laden acquired an $80,000 satellite phone from Germany--later junked when he discovered that it was being monitored by U.S. agents. And he entrusted an Egyptian, who had trained at a Texas flight school, with $210,000 to buy a small corporate jet. Bin Laden was ebullient with the purchase until the jet fell into disrepair and crashed on a Khartoum runway.

In 1993, Al-Fadl said, a Bin Laden lieutenant told him to check out a deal to buy weapons-grade uranium offered by a former Sudanese government minister.

When Al-Fadl ultimately traded $1.5 million for a 'heavy, shielded cylinder' purportedly containing the deadly ore, he was given a $10,000 bonus in cash, he said, adding that he had no clue whether the cylinder actually contained uranium--or whether the deal even went through.

But the bonus still wasn't enough for holy warriors like Al-Fadl, who complained about his Al Qaeda salary of $500 a month. So, several years later, he stole $110,000 from Bin Laden's accounts. When he was caught, Bin Laden seemed understanding at first.

Then 'The Director' hardened.

'He say, 'I can't, I can't forgive you until you give all the money,' ' Al-Fadl recalled, 'and the meeting end like that.'

So did Al-Fadl's Al Qaeda career.

He went to the visa office of an unidentified U.S. embassy in mid-1996, patiently explaining that he was among Al Qaeda's founders and feared Bin Laden's wrath. He was soon in the protective hands of American intelligence.

Portrait of Al Qaeda Suicide Bomber

That same year, Mohamed Rashed Daoud al-'Owhali's career as an Al Qaeda suicide bomber began.

It was in the mid-1990s that the young, zealous Al-'Owhali stepped foot in the Khaldan camp, the first in a series of progressively advanced Al Qaeda training facilities that he would attend in Afghanistan's Hindu Kush mountains and barren desert plains.

Before he was done, according to the FBI agent who debriefed him, Al-'Owhali would become a trusted member of the Third Martyr Barracks, First Squad of the El Bara bin Malik Division of the Army of Liberating the Islamic Holy Lands.

In short, he was on his way to paradise in the name of Allah, assigned to slip into the front seat of the Toyota truck that blew up the embassy in Nairobi.

Prosecutor Michael Garcia said Al-'Owhali 'was young, he was wealthy, he was educated. He was 21 years old. Not a sheltered 21, but an educated and hardened 21.' Al-'Owhali did not testify during the New York trial. But FBI agent Stephen Gaudin explained from the witness stand how Al-'Owhali got that way.

Gaudin had spent four straight days interviewing Al-'Owhali at the criminal investigations division of the Kenyan police in Nairobi after the young man signed an agreement waiving his rights. Al-'Owhali's only condition before he 'told his whole story' to Gaudin was that he be tried in the U.S. 'to face his enemy.'

Al-'Owhali's story is a portrait of an Al Qaeda suicide bomber.

The scion of a prominent Saudi family, Al-'Owhali was born in Liverpool, England, and moved to his parents' homeland as a boy. There, he was steeped in devout Islam, attending a religious university in Riyadh. He read books about Muslim martyrs and listened to the speeches of Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, the blind Egyptian cleric convicted of plotting the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.

When Al-'Owhali arrived at the Khaldan camp, he was ready to fight, he told Gaudin.

Basic training lasted just a month: light weapons, demolition, communications, religious ideology. Al-'Owhali told Gaudin he excelled and was given an audience with Bin Laden, who 'impressed on them the need to fight the Americans and cast them out of the Arabian Peninsula.'

Al-'Owhali then graduated to the jihad camp for training in intelligence, information management, kidnappings and hijackings, Gaudin said, adding that the young man 'explained to me that Al Qaeda is not a particular place, but it's a group, and it stands for the base of God's support, and that Bin Laden is in overall charge of Al Qaeda.'

Al Qaeda's top-tier camp, which accepted Al-'Owhali only after he battled bravely for months alongside the Taliban for control of Kabul, the Afghan capital, was to provide an advanced degree in the equivalent of terrorist management.

Gaudin said Al-'Owhali called it 'the operation and management of cell training,' where he learned video skills for target surveys, advanced communications and the detailed, four-tiered structure of Al Qaeda's terror cells: intelligence, administration, planning and execution.

At one point during his final training, Al-'Owhali told Gaudin, one of his superiors said, 'There are targets in the U.S. that we could hit, but things are not ready yet, we don't have everything prepared yet.

'First we must . . . have many attacks outside the United States, and this will weaken the U.S. and make way for our ability to strike within the U.S.'

Gaudin testified: 'At the end of this training, he had met with Mr. Bin Laden several times and had expressed to him interest in missions that he would like to do, and Mr. Bin Laden told him that, take your time. Your mission will come.'

Soon, Al-'Owhali was ordered to shave his beard and go to Yemen. He was given a passport identifying him as an Iraqi, Abdul Ali Latif, Gaudin said.

Al-'Owhali told Gaudin he spent about two months living with other Al Qaeda camp graduates in the Red Sea nation. With the help of well-established Al Qaeda operatives there, he got a Yemeni passport with yet another identity: Khalid Salim Saleh bin Rashid.

Al-'Owhali was then ordered to Pakistan, where a senior Al Qaeda operative told him 'that the mission was going to be a martyrdom operation that would result in Al-'Owhali's own death; that there was going to be . . . a target against the United States where Al-'Owhali would be assisting in driving a truck full of explosives,' Gaudin testified. The target: 'somewhere in East Africa.'

'He was never specifically told that this mission was Osama bin Laden's mission, but he always believed it to be so,' Gaudin added. 'The way things work is that Osama bin Laden, it's not likely that he would take direct credit for attacks like this.'

Finally, Al-'Owhali was told to make a martyrdom video that 'would be played upon the successful completion of his mission,' Gaudin said.

But in the end, Al-'Owhali didn't die.

The reason, his attorney and Islamic scholars say, is an important nuance in understanding Al Qaeda.

His precise mission was to ride in the passenger seat of the bomb truck. His partner--a close and equally committed friend from the Taliban wars named Azzam--was to drive. At the embassy gate, Al-'Owhali was to hop out, throw stun grenades at the embassy's entrance guard, lift the gate for the truck to pass and then blow up with it. Al-'Owhali threw the grenades. The gate went up. The bomb blew, along with Azzam, and Al-'Owhali was left with only cuts and bruises.

He went to the hospital instead of paradise, later explaining to Gaudin that 'to die after your mission had already been complete . . . is not martyrdom. It's suicide,' which is a taboo in Islam.

But it was only at the end of Gaudin's week of exhausting interviews with Al-'Owhali that the agent asked him what so many Americans are groping to understand now.

'What would it take for this fighting to stop, you know, how can we prevent this? How can we end this?' Gaudin said he asked Al-'Owhali.

What Gaudin got was boilerplate Al Qaeda: Stop supporting Israel; pull all U.S. forces out of the Arabian Peninsula; and stop 'preventing Muslims from instituting sharia [Islamic law] worldwide.'

It's unclear today whether Al-'Owhali's views have changed. The 12-member jury convicted him and three other Al Qaeda members in the bombings. It decided not to order the death penalty after his lawyer Baugh argued that Al-'Owhali was in a rage toward America for its support for Israel, its forces in Saudi Arabia, its war on Iraq and the punishing sanctions against that country. Ten of the jurors said they did so because they didn't want Al-'Owhali to become a martyr who would inspire future bloodshed.

When the World Trade Center towers collapsed 13 days ago, Al-'Owhali and nearly a dozen others charged in the embassy case were in their cells on the 10th floor of the Metropolitan Correctional Center, just six blocks away.
[ al Quaeda article ]

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 13:10:40 (EDT)
From: The Lord formerly known as gerry
Email: None
To: Francesca
Subject: Oh Woe unto your post, Francesca...
Message:
Verily it shall be first to be smitten and casteth into the Lake of Fire. For it is Written below and Spaken again above that this is the House of Ex-Prem.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 11:36:18 (EDT)
From: kYnGlYnG
Email: gkl1@techline.com
To: All
Subject: gOrRiLA bReAsT bEaTiNG !!!
Message:
EEEEEEEEEEERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRKKKKKKKKKKKK

Full STOP &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

NO WIRE HANGERS

EVER !!!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 11:55:45 (EDT)
From: hUNKYmAN
Email: gkl1@techline.com
To: kYnGlYnG
Subject: At the Feets of the Master
Message:
O Woe unto you oh poster who persisteth in idle chatter of guns and wars, for verily thy posts shall be erased from the face of the landscape forever.

I say unto you, this land is a land of wonderment and contemplation of the enigma of the Loadus One and his Sacred Scam and how we fell into ruins under his Malignant Sway. Surely we must soundeth the trumpet that others not fall sway under this strumpet!

I say let the world taketh care of the world and the place that is called 'Anything Goes Too' shall be the chosen home of those who musts persist unto the things of this world.

Let those who have ears, hear. Let those who have eyes, readeth. The Lord is a just Lord and shall no longer endure the iniquities of those sodden in the world and all things thereof...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 12:30:33 (EDT)
From: Me Jane
Email: None
To: hUNKYmAN
Subject: Re: At the Feet of the Master
Message:
I agree.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 03:48:01 (EDT)
From: suchabanana
Email: None
To: All
Subject: Elite US units in Afghanistan
Message:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2001/1002/p1s2-usmi.html
[ http://www.csmonitor.com/2001/1002/p1s2-usmi.html ]
[ Graphic Link ]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 03:53:33 (EDT)
From: such
Email: None
To: suchabanana
Subject: Let's not forget about Latin America
Message:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2001/1002/p9s2-coop.html
[ http://www.csmonitor.com/2001/1002/p9s2-coop.html ]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 04:12:28 (EDT)
From: such
Email: None
To: such
Subject: or beisbol
Message:
http://www.ridgenet.net/~kelloggd/WS/WS.htm
[ http://www.ridgenet.net/~kelloggd/WS/WS.htm ]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 08:47:24 (EDT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: such
Subject: standing room only
Message:
get your seat before it goes

Am giving 25% discount.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 13:15:09 (EDT)
From: such
Email: None
To: salam
Subject: almost forgot my lecture notes
Message:
my graduate assistant will now hand out the syllabus for HST 451: Middle Eastern Politics and the Roots of Terrorism. For those who came in late, there is a signup sheet for the waiting list to this class.

...When Islamic historian Ibn Khaldoun wrote about the cycles of civilization, he was writing from his observations of the...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 15:35:05 (EDT)
From: btdt
Email: None
To: such
Subject: Re: almost forgot my lecture notes
Message:
...don't stop......

Hey, how does Jordan play into all of this?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 16:59:26 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: btdt
Subject: Jordan's key role.
Message:
...don't stop......

Hey, how does Jordan play into all of this?


---

Jordan will be playing for the Wizards this season. He's all about 'legacy' in most of his recent interviews, but doesn't plan any trips to the Middle East. May be scouting in the Balkans though.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 19:22:08 (EDT)
From: btdt
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: Re: Jordan's key role.
Message:
Thanks for the sporting world update. Now , smart ass, if you would like to give me a history lesson on the country of Jordan, feel free.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 20:13:10 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: btdt
Subject: Re: Jordan's key role.
Message:
A little touchy aren't we? The truth is, we're so jazzed about Air getting back into the game to help out our miserable Wizards that damn near any DC area resident would've thought Michael the only Jordan with any importance. Guess the joke is wasted on anyone outside the region.

I have to say I don't know much about the country, except that it's a relatively new entity carved out since 1948 and like most places in the Middle East claims ancient roots. It's a very clan oriented society, and the country is really run by a few large vastly extended families, the size of which are actually important in determining their relative power. I had a roommate who was Jordanian, and his brother in law was in my graduating class from the Institute of Public Policy. His (the brother-in-law's name was Maen, and he used to catch me up with that Jordan/Air confusion too. My roommate, a fellow named Zaid, had a deep seated hatred of Israelis that had been infused since birth. Zaid was from the al Dwaikat clan, very large and very powerful. He was under the direct command of the Crown Prince, but since the CP did not accede to the throne I'm not sure what Zaid's fortunes have been. Suspect he's done alright.

He is a devout Muslim, and explained once that the new attitude toward Israel was hard for him to swallow, and the same was true of most Jordanians. I got the impression that the King might be in some distress there, if he didn't play his cards right. On the other hand, Queen Noir (sp?) is an American and is very popular with the people. Don't know if she's still called the queen though. The country has a very savvy technocracy, many of whom have been educated in the US (like Maen and Zaid).

I have a picture of Petra an my wall, which is one of the more enchanting tourist stops in the Middle East--a city carved directly out of the sandstone cliffs of a hideaway for prosperous thieves in Jordan. Maen thinks Jordan (the country) is the key to peace in the Middle East because of it's trade links with Israel, but he also thinks it'll take a long time to come to fruition (like 25 years). Jordan has a population that is as open to western ideas as any in that region of the world, save Israel itself. They avidly watch American soaps, would rather die than be caught on a bicycle, and have a strange system of arranged marriage whereby 'consumation' is actually more significant than the wedding. Women have very little power, though at the village level they seem to have a good deal of influence through their service as managers of the household, and as laison between clans. As the country becomes more westernized the status of women is becoming greater. Guess I knew more about Jordan than I thought.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 20:29:39 (EDT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: Re: Jordan's key role.
Message:
just add a couple a pictures and we can publish a lil pamphlet for the tourists.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 20:41:59 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: salam
Subject: Huh?
Message:
Salam:

Well, I said I wasn't an expert on Jordan and tried to change the subject to basketball, so don't blame me.

-Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 00:00:33 (EDT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: All
Subject: Would you call THIS anti-American?
Message:
No, I know, I'm losing it. Lost my rational centre. But tell me, what do you think? A little rabid? A little, uh, je ne sais quoi... a little anti-American, perhaps?
[ Canadian Feminists Speak Out! ]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 15:54:41 (EDT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Is the Brookings Institute anti-American too?
Message:
U.S. Made Mistakes in the Fight Against
Communism; Are We Destined to Repeat
Them in Battling Terrorism?

San Jose Mercury News, September 30, 2001

Ivo H. Daalder, Senior Fellow, Foreign Policy Studies,

and James M. Lindsay, Senior Fellow, Foreign Policy Studies

The post-Cold War era abruptly ended the morning of Sept.
11, 2001. From the moment terrorists turned passenger
airplanes into weapons of mass destruction, the United States
was inescapably engaged in a new ``war'' against global
terrorism. That effort now represents the organizing principle of
America's foreign and defense policy.

This is not like the war against Iraq a decade ago, in which
the United States and its allies had a clear territorial objective
that could be swiftly achieved, or the war over Kosovo, in which the Serbs
relented after 78 days of bombing Yugoslavia and NATO suffered not one combat
death.

And while the attacks on New York and Washington
immediately brought to mind memories of Pearl Harbor, our
campaign against terrorism will not be like our fight to force
Japan's unconditional surrender.

This struggle is—instead—much more like the Cold War of
the past century. Like the fight against Soviet communism,
today's fight against terrorism is likely to be drawn out,
complex, and without a clear vision of how it will be won. Even
complete success in the pending military operations in Afghanistan will not
mean victory.

Osama bin Laden's terrorist network extends well beyond Afghanistan, and
hostile groups could easily reconstitute themselves and launch other horrific
attacks even if bin Laden and his lieutenants are captured or killed.

As in the Cold War, the U.S. response is starting with the arduous task of
assembling a global coalition. Harry Truman's rousing call in 1947 ``to support
free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by
outside pressures'' set the course of U.S. history for the next four decades.
President Bush's invitation to every nation to join the United States in
``civilization's fight'' was phrased as expansively—and intended to be as
enduring.

And, like the Cold War, the new fight against terrorism
is likely to be nasty, brutish, and long. We face
ideologically motivated foes who do not shrink from
death. Our fight can end only when, as Defense
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said, Americans can once
again get on with their daily lives without fear or
thought of a possible terrorist attack.

One critical question as we enter this new ``Cold War''
is whether we have learned the lessons of the last
one—or whether we are destined to repeat its mistakes. Will we again
overemphasize military force to achieve our goals and ignore the non-military
instruments of statecraft? Will we again focus so narrowly on battle that we
forget other important foreign-policy goals?

Will the deals we cut today to gain support
from other nations prove to be major problems
in years to come—in much the same way
arming Afghan rebels to fight the Soviet Union
contributed to the terrorist threat we face
today?

It is crucial that we not only fight this new
Cold War against terrorism with the dedication and vigor that Bush emphasized
in his forceful speech to Congress on Sept. 20, but also that we do so smartly.
We must be aware of the complexities of our new fight—and of the pitfalls that
are before us.

In many stages and on many fronts

If conducted with proper care, the fight against terrorism will be fought in stages
and on multiple fronts. The first phase will be predominantly military.

The United States will seek to kill or capture Osama bin Laden, destroy his
Al-Qaida network in Afghanistan, and depose the Taliban if it does not cooperate
in the fight against terrorism. That might be accomplished through a mix of
Kosovo-style strategic bombing of fixed military targets to weaken the Taliban's
hold on power, Somalia-like commando raids to wipe out the terrorists holed up
in the unforgiving countryside, and Nicaragua-like support for the Taliban's
adversaries.

With luck, military operations would end quickly and relatively painlessly; more
realistically, they will be a major undertaking with significant costs. But even
when successful, the campaign against terrorism that Bush promised will only
have begun, much as the Korean War blunted communist expansion, but did not
end it.

The administration will need to turn to a long, grinding, difficult and expensive
campaign to disrupt, deter and defeat terrorist operations elsewhere in the world.
And while military force will continue to play some role in this effort, it will be a
distinctly secondary role.

Ultimately, a successful campaign against terrorism requires three additional
elements.

First, we must better organize and become more effective in defending our
homeland by improving intelligence collection about potential threats and
enhancing security of our transportation networks.

Second, we must build an international coalition aimed at disrupting and
destroying terrorist operations. The coalition must agree to share information
about terrorist activities; impose tighter controls over illicit money, weapons and
technology flows; isolate and pressure states that sponsor and support
terrorists; and strike militarily if targets for action present themselves.

Third, we must intensify our efforts to resolve conflicts around the world, and
especially in the Middle East. Although they did not cause the attacks on the
World Trade Center and the Pentagon, these conflicts contribute to the anger
that terrorists manipulate to their own despicable ends.

We must also intensify support for democracy and promote economic
development—especially in areas like Central Asia, the Arab world and northern
Africa, where repression and poverty provide breeding grounds for international
terrorism. Prosperous, democratic countries are our best allies against
terrorism.

Hard lessons

Because the fight against terrorism is a new Cold War, it is worthwhile
remembering some key lessons of the old one. While we ultimately triumphed in
that conflict, we made critical mistakes along the way, ones that we must now
seek to avoid.

We must begin by recognizing that military force alone is not enough; pretending
that it is takes us down a dangerous road. The militarization of
containment—which ended in our disastrous engagement in
Vietnam—undermined the American public's trust in its government and
weakened the very alliances on which we depended to win our confrontation with
the Soviet Union.

In calling on the nation to conduct a ``war'' against terrorism, the Bush
administration has helped create the impression that our victory will be a military
one. But terrorism cannot be defeated by the force of arms alone. We also need
better law enforcement, enhanced intelligence, focused diplomacy and targeted
sanctions to succeed.

We must also avoid creating new threats even as we seek to defeat the current
ones. The Vietnam War ended with that country left in tatters and under
communist rule, with a destabilized Cambodia vulnerable to genocide by a
murderous regime, and a once-pristine Laos all but destroyed.

We must not repeat that record in Afghanistan. The threat of further
destabilization there is real. Almost-constant war over more than two
decades—first against the Soviets and then against each other—has created
more than 1.5 million refugees and left many hundreds of thousands of other
people lacking sufficient food or adequate shelter. Should unrest spread, the
consequences for neighboring Pakistan—an internally divided and failing state in
possession of nuclear weapons—could be severe. The last thing we want is a
takeover of Pakistan by Islamic fundamentalist sympathizers of bin Laden.

Stabilization must follow

Whether we like it or not, military engagement would need to be followed by an
all-out effort to stabilize Afghanistan, if we hope to avoid encouraging future
generations of desperate people from becoming terrorists. Ultimately, regional
stability would require the kind of nation-building support the Bush administration
so abhors.

Finally, we must avoid making the new Cold War an all-consuming fight—one in
which we carelessly sacrifice other important foreign-policy interests and values
to serve the cause of defeating global terrorism.

During the four decades that we squared off against Soviet communism, we
embraced unsavory characters (from Franco to Mobutu to Pinochet), engaged in
highly questionable conduct (from assassinations to secret coups d'etat),
wasted billions of dollars on dead-end interventions and superfluous weapon
systems, and ignored a long list of other foreign-policy challenges (from human
rights to weapons proliferation to the environment).

The same risks exist today. To solicit support, we have lifted sanctions on
Pakistan imposed after the military's takeover in 1999, begun to side rhetorically
with Russia in its brutal fight in Chechnya, and sought assistance from such key
state sponsors of terrorism as Iran and Sudan.

These and other steps may be needed to address a short-term emergency, but
they may come at a hefty price in the long term.

The defeat of terrorism, like the defeat of Soviet communism, will not be
achieved or celebrated in one grand moment. There will be no V-E or V-J day, no
ticker-tape parade along Fifth Avenue. Our victory will, instead, be piecemeal.
Every day we go without a terrorist attack will be our triumph.

But even that limited achievement requires waging our fight against terrorism
with a clear memory of the last ``war'' that required much more than just
battlefield bravery. Otherwise, any victory will be tarnished by the new problems
we will reap.

from:http://www.brook.edu/views/op-ed/daalder/20010930.htm

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 20:19:56 (EDT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: ANOTHER stupid post!
Message:
That's pretty damned stupid, Chris. Pretty damned stupid indeed. The Brookings Institute's concerns are on a different planet than the rabid feminist bullshit. For you to even post them here in this thread as if there's any relevancy is just plain weird.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 08:01:55 (EDT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Re: ANOTHER stupid post! - you mean your's Jim?
Message:
Jim, me ol' mucker, maybe you didn't realise that the article I quoted and linked to was FROM the Brookings Institute website.

You say that the concerns of the feminist you quoted are 'on a different planet' to the concerns of the Brookings Institute.

The two parties certainly have very different agendas, but don't you think there's just the teeniest connection between what you perceive as Sunera Thobani's 'anti-Americanism' when she says:

'From Chile to El Salvador to Nicaragua to Iraq, the path of U.S. foreign policy is soaked in blood'
- Sunera Thobani

and this from the Brookings Institute:

'During the four decades that we squared off against Soviet communism, we
embraced unsavory characters (from Franco to Mobutu to Pinochet), engaged in
highly questionable conduct (from assassinations to secret coups d'etat),
wasted billions of dollars on dead-end interventions and superfluous weapon
systems, and ignored a long list of other foreign-policy challenges (from human
rights to weapons proliferation to the environment).

… to solicit support, we have lifted sanctions on Pakistan imposed after the military's takeover in 1999, begun to side rhetorically with Russia in its brutal fight in Chechnya, and sought assistance from such key state sponsors of terrorism as Iran and Sudan.'

- Ivo H. Daalder and James M. Lindsay (from the article at the Brookings Institute website).

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 12:22:36 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Re: ANOTHER stupid post! - you mean your's Jim?
Message:
'From Chile to El Salvador to Nicaragua to Iraq, the path of U.S. foreign policy is soaked in blood'

versus rational accounting of US foreign policy mistakes and blunders, none of which imputes any intent to harm innocents or even any underlying suspect political motivation. Yeah, I see a difference. What I don't understand is why *you* don't? You figure the deliberately charged language would be remotely acceptable to the Brookings author? Not in the same planet. Not even in the same universe. The fact that you don't see a difference is a measure of just how messed up you are.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 15:01:01 (EDT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: your methods don't smell too good, Scott
Message:
So you're the kind of guy who needs to use the 'straw man' tactic eh?

Caricaturing, stereotyping (or just plain misrepresenting) a position to make it easier to attack is not doing your credibility any good, Scott. Hell, man, that tactic's even mentioned in Carl Sagan's 'Balony Detection Kit' as one of the common fallacies of logic and rhetoric when testing arguments and detecting fallacious or fraudulent arguments.

Your insinuation that I don't see a difference between the two parties mentioned above and am therefore 'messed up'? - that stinks, Scott, that tactic really stinks. I said specifically that 'the two parties certainly have very different agendas'. Thanks for trying to make me out to be so dumb that I supposedly couldn't see any difference between even the style of the two writers. You really know how to win a guy over to taking the opposing point of view seriously. I wonder - was your misrepresentation deliberate, or just symptomatic of your own myopic desire to win points in this argument?

I wouldn't dream of asking whether you can tell the difference between style and content, but since you had the nerve to ask me in an earlier thread whether I knew the meaning of the word 'rational', - well if that's the kind of arrogant disrespect you want to pepper this discussion with, then include me out. I've got better things to do with my time and energy than take it to that level.

To describe US foreign policy down the years as being 'soaked in blood' can certainly be seen as florid use of rhetoric. But is it altogether inaccurate? Now, just because I'm prepared to ask myself that question, doesn't mean that I share Sunera Thobani's motives or opinions one little bit, so don't bother trying to insinuate that I would.

For sure blood has been shed in pursuit of America's aims abroad, not least the blood of her own forces in Vietnam (just how many died as a result of that 'dead-end intervention'?)

But I need to research my history here. So ... till later,

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 15:37:26 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Empty your pants.
Message:
Chris:

Yes, your clarity is mighty impressive. The fact of the matter is that you *don't* see much difference between the florid rhetoric and the academician's prose or you wouldn't have brought it up in the first place. And if you *do* see a significant difference then, as Jim says, why bring it up? Seems to me you're attempting to legitimate the 'blood soaked' rhetoric, not the good Doctor's, right? It doesn't take a Ph.D. or any special debate skills to see that.

Look, I've already given you a definition of what I believe to be anti-American or anti-British or whatever--wheedled out of me by your incessant whining I might add--and you've seen fit to ignore it completely. This 'straw man' nonsense is a pantload. That worked for you in the past, did it?

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 16:03:29 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Guess someone finally used that link.
Message:
I posted the link to Brookings over a week ago. Good article. I don't see him appealing to any anti-American sentiments. He's just thinking through the problem. But willingness to use the military is what makes all the rest possible.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 07:53:04 (EDT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: It depends what anti-american is?
Message:
For example, how do I know whether one is anti-American from these sentences?

I believe America should reconsider using military force in Afghanistan.

I think America shouldn’t use force in Afghanistan.

America shouldn’t use force in Afghanistan.

One can also consider the statement:

Fuck Britain.

Will that be considered anti-America?

Now let’s think about what Bush said:

If you are not with us then you are against us.

Interesting because the “us” means many. Well we know that America is one, so if for argument sake you add Britain then I would say we could assume that makes a “many” which justifies the “us”. Seeing that Bush having said that, and now that we understand what the “us” stands for, then it is clear that if one is not with America then one is not with Britain. So that leads us to deduce that if one says fuck Britain then one is also telling America to get fucked, which leads us back to thinking that it is very probable that this is anti America. [Though we still don’t know what that means because you did not define it]

How about saying fuck Pakistan. Same thing. Pakistan is with him [Bush] so if one says Pakistan supported terrorism then that will also mean America supports terrorism, which can’t be, because America doesn’t support terrorism since saying the reciprocal implies that you don’t support America and again you won’t be with him or with Britain. Which also mean you are telling Britain to get fucked.

Can one say fuck China? No. How about fuck all the blacks. No. What about fucking the Arabs? Well you can probably fuck some of them. Like Iraq, Syria, South Yemen, Libya and Sudan and leave the rest………blah blah blah blah.

Last time I counted there was something like 199 countries. If you take Afghanistan out, that will be 198. I think Bush has done what no man has ever done. He has united earth on one big family. We are all with each other, no one against anything anymore. I am with you, you are with me, we are with PatC and PatC is with Selene and Selene is with me and Marianne and they are with another lot.

See I can’t tell you to fuck off anymore. Nobody can tell no one to fuck off. Really, it’s a miracle.

So, as far as am concerned, those girls in the conference, they should pack up and go home because we are with them already and they are with us otherwise we will not be with Bush,yes?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 06:08:58 (EDT)
From: berni
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Re: Would you call THIS anti-American?
Message:
Hi Jim,
The last sentence seems to sum it up 'a bunch of radical feminists got together and they started to diss everyone' but, as you may have guessed, I would class this 'anti' rhetoric in the same bin as many of the 'pro' flag-waving let's-start-a-war pieces that seem to be appearing lately.
Did you know that Clear Channel, the company that monopolises the radio waves in the U.S., ordered it's stations not to play a list of songs in the aftermath of the WTC tragedy. Most of them ballady peace songs such as 'Imagine', 'Bridge over Troubled Water', and 'Peace Train'.
Here's the link

http://www.salon.com/ent/feature/2001/04/30/clear_channel/

What's that all about? I could understand banning heavy metal, rap or other violent type music but such songs could not have added to peoples suffering.

Anyhow, nothing to do with your thread but...
I have a genuine question. I hope you don't think I am trying to put forward any opposing views or have any sort of hidden agenda but, as someone with an interest in sociology and psychology I wanted to ask your real feelings about the statement..

'For another, people naturally identify most with those most alike them. The WTC and Pentagon victims were, in many respects, a lot more like most of us posters here, so it's only natural that our empathy would be drawn more readily to those victims than to those in Kashmir. That's just a function of human nature...'
..and does this mean that you would tend to have more sympathy for a middle class white person - perhaps a child - who appeared on the news ( a stranger to you ) suffering with a fatal debilitating illness ( or a victim of some other terrible circumstances ) than someone in the same condition on another news programme but who was of a different race, country, culture etc.?
I know I would be more sympathetic, to say the least, if it was someone I knew and cared for - but I personally would feel the same towards the suffering of strangers no matter whether they were part of my social group or not. Surely suffering transcends all grouping, and the fact that all of us humans feel hunger, cold, emotional and physical pain puts us on an equal footing in certain circumstances?
I was asking some friends about this last night and there were a couple who feel the same way as you seem to be expressing in your statement, although they couldn't really give a reason.
You may be right and it is a normal way to feel and, like my lack of interest in football or inability to feel patriotic, I am abnormal in failing to identify with my own kind.
BTW last week you asked me if I was competitive. I have enjoyed many a game of chess, badminton, pool etc. and have never honestly cared whether I won or lost ( although I have won a fair few matches ) but when it comes to Poker, one of my favourite games, I am fiercely competitive - well there's money involved ! Unfortunately this does not help me win as often as I'd like.
best wishes
berni

http://www.salon.com/ent/feature/2001/04/30/clear_channel/

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 14:07:15 (EDT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: berni
Subject: That's why you're a better person than me
Message:
Berni,

I'm sure you would feel exactly the same about any suffering of anyone, anywhere. Me, I'm a bit more parochial than that. The more I can relate to someone, the more empathy I naturally feel. Worse, the more I think their loss somehow bodes ill for my own safety, the more I care too. Hell, fella, I'm just like that. But don't worry, one day with proper education and the right upbringing no none will feel anything but equal with everyone, anything, anywhere, etc.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 16:29:20 (EDT)
From: bernee
Email: bernee@flashmail.com
To: Jim
Subject: No Jim - you're better than me
Message:
You wanna start a pro/anti Jim argument? :)

Sorry Jim,
I expect you noticed my little nudge of a reminder to reply to this in another thread - probably just about the same time you posted the above reply.
I feel a bit sanctimonious after your much appreciated honest reply. I think the reason I feel the same way about the suffering of all people (and even creatures ) is for the same reason that you give for differentiating between those you relate to and those you don't.
i.e.Worse, the more I think their loss somehow bodes ill for my own safety, the more I care too

It's the fact that I imagine anyone elses pain happening to me that probably makes me ambivalent to whether I can relate to them or not.
So, if that makes any sense, I am far from perfect and worry that I should be more concerned about humanity than concerned for my own comfort and safety. I suppose I give a thought to the wife,children and few remaining friends occassionaly - unless they hog the computer all night playing 'SIMS', an interactive game tha is apparently addictive and involves creating people and overseeing their progress through life as they have children, get mortgages, have parties, rows, move house, get new jobs etc. etc. A bit like playing God. I'm keeping well away from it.
take care
berni

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 01:09:39 (EDT)
From: Little Mo
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject:
Message:
I wonder if Ms Thobani will be joining the battalions of feminist academics massing inside Pakistan, 'en route' to save their Afghani sisters? The AirCav are REDUNDANT!!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 01:07:03 (EDT)
From: Little Mo
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject:
Message:
I wonder if Ms Thobani will be joining the battalions of feminist academics massing inside Pakistan, 'en route' to save their Afghani sisters? Or not.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 01:03:00 (EDT)
From: Francesca
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: It's anti-sensical
Message:
This one is the corker:

'There will be no emancipation for women anywhere on this planet until the western domination of this planet is ended.'

Although it has been hard won, in the past 50 years women in the west have come a long way. We arguably enjoy more freedom than anywhere else, although we are still not 'equal' to men. The US has pretty much given up on the Equal Rights Amendment. All I can hope is that the inroads that are being made will amount to the same thing.

Laws and attitudes continue to change.

--f

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 13:51:11 (EDT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Francesca
Subject: Send these gals to Taliban Camp
Message:
That's how I feel about it. Give me a break!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 16:10:01 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: She's come a long way, baby.
Message:
A friend of mine told me recently about a cartoon in the Washington Post that depicted these Taliban Mullahs all sitting around in a circle listening bug-eyed as some Pakistani operative explained that the US plan was to provide college education for all their women. Maybe it was funnier in the cartoon version.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 06:52:52 (EDT)
From: don
Email: None
To: Francesca
Subject: Re: It's anti-sensical
Message:
wow, didn't think i ever teamed up with feminists, right on gals,
that's been my point of view all along, those gals are goddam right!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 01:54:37 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Francesca
Subject: Re: It's anti-sensical
Message:
Fran:

Personally I think feminism is another example of how a cult can warp your mind. I was in a class taught by Betty Friedan, and this poor young woman expounded on her theory as to how men were responsible for genetically suppressing women, making them tame or something. Ms. Freidan looked positively mortified. (I was the only male in the class, so she was willing to do damn near anything to keep me there, including letting me talk twice as much as any of the women.) There was another young woman who was convinced that every male she know was out to rape her. Anyway, the class wasn't about feminism but ageism, so most of these children were sorely disappointed, being barely out of their teens. A singular experience.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 19:34:30 (EDT)
From: G
Email: None
To: All
Subject: Taliban torture
Message:
An article by Christina Lamb of the London Sunday Telegraph appearing in the Washington Times (right-wing and Moonie-owned but so what) entitled 'Taliban defector tells of torture tactics':
http://www.washingtontimes.com/world/20011001-96150849.htm
From the article:
''Anyone can do beatings and starve people. I want your unit to find new ways of torture so terrible that the screams will frighten even crows from their nests and if the person survives he will never again have a night's sleep.'
These were the instructions of the commandant of the Afghan secret police to his new recruits. ...
'As we drove around at night with our guns, local people would come to us and say there's someone watching a video in this house or some men playing cards in that house,' he said.
'Basically any form of pleasure was outlawed,' Mr. Hassani said, 'and if we found people doing any of these things, we would beat them with staves soaked in water — like a knife cutting through meat — until the room ran with their blood or their spines snapped. Then we would leave them with no food or water in rooms filled with insects until they died'

It is the moral responsibility of the civilized world to see to it that the Taliban are overthrown, they are as evil as the Nazis.

I wonder if anyone blamed the U.S. when the Nazis attacked U.S. ships. There were people who thought the U.S. shouldn't go to war against the Nazis. It's a good thing we did.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 07:21:17 (EDT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: G
Subject: Re: Taliban torture
Message:
G wrote:

''It is the moral responsibility of the civilized world to see to it that the Taliban are overthrown, they are as evil as the Nazis''

I agree wholeheartedly. The trouble is, Afghans have been trying to tell the world about the cruelties of the Taliban for several years now and nobody was listening. It has taken the suicide attacks on America to wake people up to the horror.

I know because some months ago, I and some others posted links to web sites revealing the Taliban's cruelties and there was little interest on this board. This board is just an indication of opinion in general, of course.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 17:58:11 (EDT)
From: Pat:C)
Email: None
To: All
Subject: America, curl up and die
Message:
Blame America First . . .
. . . or Israel-whichever.

By Ramesh Ponnuru

America is guilty. America is always guilty. Even when it's attacked. So it appears, at least, to a certain type of commentator. When the Towers fell, when the Pentagon was pierced, when thousands of our countrymen were slaughtered — the America Last pundits were there to explain how we had brought these calamities on ourselves. We were attacked, they explained, because we had angered the world. Had we not walked out of the Durban conference? Had we not spurned the Kyoto Protocol? Osama bin Laden, environmentalist in a hurry.
What has drawn the most fire, of course, is America's alliance with Israel. Critics of that alliance, on both the left and the right, have argued that but for it we would never have been attacked. The bluntest statements have appeared in the British press. In an article for the Observer called 'Who Will Dare Damn Israel?' Richard Ingrams wrote that 'the undeniable and central fact behind the disaster [is] that Israel is now and has been for some time an American colony.' Also in the Observer, Edward Said blamed America's 'support for the 34-year-old Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories.' Similar views, more obliquely expressed, have appeared in the American media.

It follows from this position that America cannot defend itself from terrorism without disassociating itself from Israel. The thesis was expounded at length in Salon, a liberal online magazine, by its executive editor, Gary Kamiya. 'We must pressure Israel to take the concrete steps necessary to provide justice for the Palestinian people,' he wrote; we must demonstrate to Islamic states 'that it is a new day, that Israel is not the tail that wags the American dog.' Otherwise, we will never enjoy peace.

A more modest version of this view has found a home in the Bush administration, especially in its State Department: We must push Israel toward peace with Arab countries in order to get those countries to join our war on terrorism.

All of these supposed connections between the September 11 attacks and American policy toward Israel are extremely dubious. It is almost certainly not the case that we could have subdued our attackers' wrath by forsaking Israel; we will probably not win friends by doing so now; and it is very unlikely the case that we must make 'progress' on the Arab-Israeli conflict to fight terrorism.

Let's start with bin Laden's motives, about which we need not speculate. He had his declaration of jihad against America published in February 1998. (This is the document in which he declared, 'To kill Americans and their allies, both civil and military, is an individual duty of every Muslim who is able.') His bill of particulars against America mentions, first, the U.S. 'occupation' of Saudi Arabia. On his deathbed, the Prophet Mohammed is said to have demanded that only Muslims dwell in the holy land of Arabia; the American presence — a presence that we do not maintain, please note, for the purpose of protecting Israel — is therefore a desecration. (The idea of killing random people to protect the holy land is, however, a modern innovation rather than orthodox Islamic doctrine.) Bin Laden's second complaint concerns our policies against Iraq. Only then does the declaration turn to 'the petty state of the Jews' and 'their occupation of Jerusalem and their killing of Muslims in it.'

The radical Islamists' broader quarrel is with American power: not with the uses of that power, but with the fact of it. We are infidels. And we are liberal, capitalist, modern, powerful, and rich; therefore hated. Former Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu made the point well when he wrote in the aftermath of the September massacres that the Islamists do not hate the West because of Israel; they hate Israel because of the West. They call us, not Israel, 'the Great Satan.'

Obviously, our friendship with Israel increases the hostility of Arabs and Muslims toward us. But short of abandoning Israel altogether, what are we to do about that? It is not as though American policy has been simply and unequivocally pro-Israel. Soviet arms protected the infant state in 1948, while America imposed an embargo. America stopped Israel (along with Britain and France) from toppling the Egyptian regime in 1956, and stopped Israel from pushing for further military victories at the end of the 1973 war. Camp David was, in part, an American bribe to get Israel to return the Sinai to Egypt; and a deal between Egypt and Israel would probably have been easier to conclude had Jimmy Carter not insisted on addressing Palestinian grievances too. The Reagan administration joined the rest of the world in condemning Israel for bombing Iraq's Osiraq nuclear plant in 1981; a year later, it helped rescue Yasser Arafat from the Israelis in Lebanon.

During the Gulf War, Washington vetoed Israel's plans to protect itself from Iraqi missiles. In the early 1990s, the first Bush administration worked to bring down Yitzhak Shamir's government because it was deemed too intransigent toward the Palestinians; in the late 1990s, the Clinton administration worked against Netanyahu's government for the same reason. There is good reason to think that it was American pressure that brought Israel in 1993 to Oslo and thereafter kept it participating in the 'peace process' inaugurated there.

The point is not that America has been anti-Israel, which would be an absurd contention. It is that Kamiya's counsel that it is 'time for America to start throwing its weight around . . . with Israel' comes much too late. Israel does not wag the American dog. A policy of pressure on Israel would not be a bold departure from past policy. It would be more of the same. And it is worth noting that none of these calibrations of American policy have bought us any credit among those who hate us (nor, for that matter, have our military interventions to save Muslims' lives in Bosnia and Kosovo).

For decades, many of us have preferred to pretend that Arabs' demands of Israel were moderate and reasonable, and that we could appease them with moderate and reasonable policies of our own. But it should now be clear for all with eyes to see that their hostility to Israel is not primarily about settlements on the West Bank or even the occupation (what's left of it). They oppose the Jewish state's existence. Their solution to the 'Arab-Israeli problem' is the final solution: Israel's destruction. As long as Americans are an obstacle to that dream, it will be held against us.

Yet the fundamental problem in the Mideast is not the existence of the Israeli state. It is the despotism of the Arab states. There is not a market democracy in the bunch. These states are corrupt and brutal. They are theocracies, or precarious autocracies, or secular totalitarian states: tyrannies all, deniers of freedom, republics of fear, enemies of civility and human flourishing. (The outlines of another such state can be seen in the Palestinian Authority.) They are governments that make constant war on their own peoples. They cannot make peace because they are not at peace themselves.

There may be occasions when America can ally with some of those states, as we did during the Gulf War. On these occasions, there is no need to mollify public opinion in the Arab world — whatever 'public opinion' would mean in this unfree context — by pressuring Israel. A decade ago, a lot of people suggested that there had to be 'linkage' between the Israeli-Palestinian and American-Iraqi conflicts: We would have to address the former to win the latter. The U.S. largely resisted the demand for linkage, with the significant exception of barring Israel from participating in the coalition against Iraq. As it turned out, the linkage worked the other way: Having won the war, America was in a better position to force the PLO to the table. (That we made a mess of things once this occurred does not invalidate the point.)

The Arab states responded to power used with resolve. Later, they responded to American weakness. America's position in the Mideast slipped as it became clear that we were not serious about ending the Iraqi threat — and that Israel was tiring of its permanent war footing. To turn away from our ally now would be regarded, too, as weakness.

And rightly so. It is one thing to make a case on the merits that our foreign policies should be changed. Perhaps we should end our alliance with Israel. Perhaps we should remove our troops from Saudi Arabia, or lift the sanctions on Iraq. But not under duress. A policy designed to keep from offending people who might be inclined to attack us is a policy of preemptive capitulation to terrorists. In his address to Congress, President Bush explained why the terrorists kill: 'With every atrocity they hope that America grows fearful, retreating from the world and forsaking our friends.' The terrorists' hope is the frank advice of those who would have us back away from Israel because of the September 11 attacks.

Dishonorable in principle, such a policy would also fail in practice. There would be no obvious stopping-point to it. Having seen terrorism accomplish its objectives in the Mideast, why should North Korea not use it to make us withdraw our protection from South Korea? Beijing could sponsor terrorism until we let it swallow Taiwan. In the past, Puerto Rican independistas have resorted to terror. Etc. Shall we capitulate to them all?

Here, then, is the true strategy being recommended to America: Curl up and die.

From the October 15, 2001, issue of National Review

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 13:10:09 (EDT)
From: Cynthia
Email: None
To: Pat:C)
Subject: Don't You Curl Up and Die!
Message:
Hey Pat,

If you go then there won't be anything good to read that doesn't require a degree in political science and history. ;);)

If you're a white supremecist, then I'm a gay man!

Love to you....take a breath or two, count to ten...there you go, back to the fray...

Visualize perfect Vermont 70 degree air, sunny, with mountains full of color. Oammmmmm.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 16:48:18 (EDT)
From: Dermot
Email: None
To: Cynthia
Subject: you started it all Cynthia, remember???
Message:
When you were, quite understandably, upset on Sep 11th and the days that followed.

'AMERICA IS AT WAR!!' and other posts. Remeber?

I don't have a degree in history or politics, just a human being trying to make sense of it all.

Dermot

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 19:17:35 (EDT)
From: Cynthia
Email: None
To: Dermot
Subject: OH! Cut the Shit!
Message:
Dermot, et al,

I am so sick of your self-righteous, intellectual, erudite attitudes.

I said things on that first and second day that you guys have just concluded this week! And goddess forbid anyone come forward as a feminist and not be accused of being in an ideological cult!

Fuck all ya, you ain't all that smart. I've learned a lot more that I need to know about myself, yes, the most important thing, in the past two weeks than all of you have argued about in the past two weeks.

Fuck you guys! I agree with the Canadian feminist, but I don't like her tone, just like I didn't like Falwel's or Robinson's tone, and insiteful words at a time when you guys are too busy being intellectual to sit back and notice if you have any feelings about this.

Talk about your feelings for once. Fuck the brains. You've brained yourselves out. And fuck the trolls, too. Who gives a shit about a premie troll? I certainly don't.

And, yes, I was very anxious on that first day. Blame me for your addiction to intellectualism? Fuck it, I give up.

Have a nice day,
Cynthia, the ignorant feminist

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 03:34:55 (EDT)
From: Dermot
Email: None
To: Cynthia
Subject: It doesn'y surprise me ..ha
Message:
Your hateful feminism ......why don't you go live with the Taliban?.

And in response to your post

FUCK YOU TOO

AND TAKE YOUR POMPOUS MINDLESS FEMIINISM TO SOME WEIRD FEMiININE CULT MEETING

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 20:58:45 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Cynthia
Subject: Well, I'm going to talk about my feelings...
Message:
OK.... OK.... OK.... Well, I've been sitting her for 30 minutes and have to conclude I don't have any. No wait...! Er..., it's gone. Maybe next time.

--Scott (Who learned that feelings were a big liability from women. Not all women, of course. Just the bad ones.) T.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 20:13:02 (EDT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Cynthia
Subject: How can you possibly say that?
Message:
Cynthia,

The feminist from U.B.C. is so wrong it makes me sick. The U.S. has fought hard to protect her freedom in two world wars and a number of conflicts standing up to and ultimately defeating communism. She's a feminist? What does she think of the plight of women under the Taliban? That's got to be the most horrifying scenario imaginable. But let's get adventurous and ask a trickier question, how about the plight of women throughout much of the Islamic world? Where are the mothers of the kids who go out to stone the Israelis? How about the mothers of the suicide bombers there?

It's stupid, in my humble opinion, to blame 'men' for all this shit. Men are raised by women for the most part, aren't they? Anyway, whatever makes you feel better than others, I guess. No harm feeling that way, is there? No, of course not.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 20:39:37 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: On Bin Laden's Mom
Message:
This is a hoot. Apparently UBL phoned his stepmother, who is being treated for cancer in a hospital in S.A., on September 9th. The call was intercepted by the NSA and turns out to be some of the most compelling proof of Bin Laden's complicity in the WTC attacks. He tells her that 'something big' is going to happen in two days, and that he may, as a result, be on the run and unable to contact her for quite awhile. I wonder if he was talking about his big stock deal?

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 14:42:13 (EDT)
From: Carl
Email: None
To: Cynthia
Subject: I think we got it wrong:
Message:
He going down to the Curl Up and Dye Beauty Salon around the corner for a shampoo and and a trim. He'll be right back, lookin' sharp and talkin' sassy. He knows he's needed around here to puncture the inflated self-impressed rhetoric of the blowhards.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 16:45:20 (EDT)
From: Dermot
Email: None
To: Carl
Subject: Quite impudent of us hey Carl??
Message:
To have any thoughts or feelings about September 11 and any possible repurcussions.

Yeah you're right , we're just a bunch of blowhards ....far better to take a stand on one of Pats tantrums.

Thanks for the lesson

Dermot

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 15:02:44 (EDT)
From: Cynthia
Email: None
To: Carl
Subject: Re: I think we got it wrong:
Message:
Yes Carl,

The ''Curl Up and Dye Beauty Salon'' is where PatC is right now.

Thanks for the ''puncture the inflated self-impressed rhetoric of the blowhards'' comment.

But I guess I'm out of their league...:)

Cynthia, not taking myself so seriously these days...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 15:54:44 (EDT)
From: Thelma the Church Ladyb)
Email: None
To: Cynthia
Subject: Re: I think you got it wrong:
Message:
I wouldn't be seen dead at the ''Curl Up and Dye Salon.'' Everytime I go there my hair gets frizzy and falls out. But I do need a new Do for darshan next month in Delhi. And some new silicone tits as these ones are getting hard and crumbly. ;)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 18:32:29 (EDT)
From: Pat:C)
Email: None
To: Pat:C)
Subject: PS Bye, guys, I'm out of here
Message:
It seems that accepting reality (part of which is that the USA is the current imperialist and colonialist power) is not on the agenda here. I certainly don't rubber stamp everything that is done by the empire but I guess I'm just not pessimistic enough to think that everything that it does is evil.

And now I see that Rick, whoever he is, is equating my view of history as cultural evolution as white supremacism. Yep, I know when I'm outnumbered. I think I'll get out before I am painted into the racist, jingoist, conservative corner by people who have obviously not studied history.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 06:54:47 (EDT)
From: don
Email: None
To: Pat:C)
Subject: Re: PS Bye, guys, I'm out of here
Message:
great, and take scott along with you too, drink some whiskey and curse
those commies !!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 01:15:24 (EDT)
From: Rick
Email: None
To: Pat:C)
Subject: Re: PS Bye, guys, I'm out of here
Message:
Pat,
I'm not equating your view of history as cultural evolution as white supremacism. I'm pointing to western culture as inundated with white supremacism. I looked around for your email address to communicate this with you but couldn't find it. Perhaps someone who has your address can pass it along. I hope you don't go.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 02:13:34 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Rick
Subject: I might leave too.
Message:
Inundated with white supremacism? Huh? You know what inundated means, right? How about 'white supremacism?' Could we have an operational definition or two? You know, you might just entertain the possiblity that Pat doesn't consider you a very challenging opponent. Could you at least try to keep things interesting?

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 00:23:56 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Pat:C)
Subject: Javelinas
Message:
Pat:

I understand. For what it's worth I think you are one of a small group of 5 or 6 people who've expressed sufficiently good judgment that it would be worth participating in further discussion. If this were a class I'd have told the rest to go home and take a prerequisite. There's an old saying about jewelry, suidae, and ersatz accessorization.

Looks like the damn site is loading so slowly it's not worth hanging around anyway.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 21:15:47 (EDT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: Pat:C)
Subject: Re: PS Bye, guys, I'm out of here
Message:
he, calm down. It's ok to argue. Look at Scott, he left few time and he is back. Take is easy, and when you're really pissed off, go to AG and let it rip like I do ())())())
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 22:13:17 (EDT)
From: Bob
Email: None
To: salam
Subject: Re: PS Bye, guys, I'm out of here
Message:
I am too surprised by a lot of the anti American issues presented on the forum. Of course in hindsight there are always plenty of mistakes made in the past. That does not prevent us looking at the systematic indoctrination of a large group of muslims by tactics we are very familiar about: cult tacticts!!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 19:45:08 (EDT)
From: Moley
Email: None
To: Pat:C)
Subject: Pat - don't go now
Message:
I'm gonna Email you. I refuse to fall into an 'Us' and 'Them' mentality with you. Read Nige's Appleyard thread again tomorrow, and my reply to Jim.

Nige is disappointed over what you said in that you ignored his points completely and came out guns blazing at gawd knows what...

Here you have the exact thing that I was trying to say to Jim - It's just not possible to side with 'America' (whatever that means) without inadvertently antagonising the dispossessed.

Maybe that is wrong - but it is the way it is, just as much as you say that it is 'reality' that the US is 'the current imperialist'.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 17:00:30 (EDT)
From: Pat:C)
Email: None
To: Moley
Subject: It's okay for you to say that
Message:
But you just started getting involved in the political discussion and I've been doing it for two weeks. I'm politicked out. Anyway I see a lynch mob on the horizon.

Yes, I was probably being unfair to you and Nige and definitely snubbed his analysis of Appleyard. My only excuse is that I was getting sick of theories, abstract analyses.

It's best that I don't talk politics here. I'm an old curmudgeon but I really don't like Them vs US stuff which is why I don't live in the gay ghetto of SF. I prefer to live in an ordinary working class area where whites are outnumbered and most of us are immigrants with a similar take on the US - it's great.

As I said to Fran by email, I've been on the wrong side politically in SF for 22 years and know when to keep my mouth shut. Come to think of it I was on the wrong side for 20 odd years in apartheid South Africa. Maybe I'm a contrarian. No, just an old fogy.

No hard feelings I hope. At least we all agree on one thing - Rawat sucks as Salam would say.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 19:35:15 (EDT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: Pat:C)
Subject: but what about those of us that love to read you?
Message:
My favorite issue is the currency war issue, I think all policy issues
take a back seat to the MAIN thing that the us govt is trying to
protect at all costs all the time, and that is the DOLLAR as the
global currency.
That is the source of all the real power and you can virtually all analysis of govt behaviour does not see how this one issue is in the
background and it is always the first thing that is considered when
an action is considered.
It is the real game, money and power, and the financial superstructure
is the most interesting but most hidden area.

I will post my favorite writer on the subject.
His comments from this week.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 20:41:15 (EDT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: bill
Subject: What in the world is THIS now?
Message:
My favorite issue is the currency war issue, I think all policy issues take a back seat to the MAIN thing that the us govt is trying to protect at all costs all the time, and that is the DOLLAR as the
global currency.

Funny, Bill, I thought the main thing was trying to prevent more terrorist attacks. But then what do I know, huh?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 18:35:18 (EDT)
From: JHB
Email: None
To: Pat:C)
Subject: Tantrum number 39?
Message:
See you soon, Pat:)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 08:56:22 (EDT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: Re: Tantrum number 39?
Message:
are the tantrum counter too?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 14:25:11 (EDT)
From: salsa
Email: None
To: All
Subject: I told you so...
Message:
Not to be one which gloats on the aspects of the old line said with a grin ( I told you so!)

But,I told you so!

Here inside these bills lay the planned over throw and which most likely will be passed with a ( hip, hip Hooray! ) If this and other bills forth coming are not passed, hang onto your hat, mighty nuclear winds sure to blow your hair back for that complete attitude adjustment for peace and security bought to you by your secret state police.

The present flag wavering public,with blood lust in their eyes for this weeks monster man under the bed,filled with a nightly dose of propaganda,will shake to their overpriced sneakers for safety, peace, and security,with the bigger acts of TERROR that are brought home to you by a cold and sinus relief advertiser on the 21 inch peephole to paradise.

The modern Rome,has no need for you to travel to the colliseum citizen, the killing of Christians comes full color/ Cable / Satellite/ Surround Sound Stereo.Relax 24 hr coverage that you can video tape for the parts that are missed by falling asleep, after all the Beer, Bread and Circus, dont worry you wont miss a thing.

Please protect me, please, follow me , phone tap me, email watch me, make all my papers open to you ,( my protector ).Big fat cow pie stories that if you give up your freedom, we the protectors will keep you safe and snug like a bug in a rug. Some truth there, a bug in a rug only ready to be stomped with the boot of a fascist, most of these laws were written years ago and could not pass the house, but now its on a fast tract to tyranny.

Signs, Signs, tell the times but words can never hurt me..............wrong
I TOLD YOU SO!

The honey comb reporter Jeffrey William;Hills Emerson Review Newspaper.

You can find the proposed legislation by entering S.1438 into the Thomas
search engine

Thomas
http://thomas.loc.gov/

S.1438
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Placed on the
Calendar in the Senate)

SEC. 1062. AUTHORITY TO ENSURE DEMILITARIZATION OF SIGNIFICANT MILITARY
EQUIPMENT FORMERLY OWNED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE.

(a) PROHIBITION- It is unlawful for any person to possess significant
military equipment formerly owned by the Department of Defense unless-- (1)
the military equipment has been demilitarized in accordance with standards
prescribed by the Secretary of Defense; (2) the person is in possession of
the military equipment for the purpose of demilitarizing the equipment
pursuant to a Federal Government contract; or (3) the person is
specifically authorized by law or regulation to possess the military equipment.

(b) REFERRAL TO ATTORNEY GENERAL- The Secretary of Defense shall notify the
Attorney General of any potential violation of subsection (a) of which the
Secretary becomes aware.

(c) AUTHORITY TO REQUIRE DEMILITARIZATION- (1) The Attorney General may
require any person who, in violation of subsection (a), is in possession of
significant military equipment formerly owned by the Department of
Defense-- (A) to demilitarize the equipment; (B) to have the equipment
demilitarized by a third party; or (C) to return the equipment to the
Federal Government for demilitarization.

(2) When the demilitarization of significant military equipment is carried
out pursuant to subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1), an officer or
employee of the United States designated by the Attorney General shall have
the right to confirm, by inspection or other means authorized by the
Attorney General, that the equipment has been demilitarized.

(3) If significant military equipment is not demilitarized or returned to
the Federal Government for demilitarization as required under paragraph (1)
within a reasonable period after the Attorney General notifies the person
in possession of the equipment of the requirement to do so, the Attorney
General may request that a court of the United States issue a warrant
authorizing the seizure of the military equipment in the same manner as is
provided for a search warrant. If the court determines that there is
probable cause to believe that the person is in possession of significant
military equipment in violation of subsection (a), the court shall issue a
warrant authorizing the seizure of such equipment.

(d) DEMILITARIZATION OF EQUIPMENT- (1) The Attorney General shall transfer
any military equipment returned to the Federal Government or seized
pursuant to subsection (c) to the Department of Defense for demilitarization.

(2) If the person in possession of significant military equipment obtained
the equipment in accordance with any other provision of law, the Secretary
of Defense shall bear all costs of transportation and demilitarization of
the equipment and shall either-- (A) return the equipment to the person
upon completion of the demilitarization; or (B) reimburse the person for
the cost incurred by that person to acquire the equipment if the Secretary
determines that the cost to demilitarize and return the property to the
person would be prohibitive.

(e) ESTABLISHMENT OF DEMILITARIZATION STANDARDS- (1) The Secretary of
Defense shall prescribe regulations regarding the demilitarization of
military equipment.

(2) The regulations shall be designed to ensure that-- (A) the equipment,
after demilitarization, does not constitute a significant risk to public
safety and does not have-- (i) a significant capability for use as a
weapon; or (ii) a uniquely military capability; and (B) any person from
whom private property is taken for public use under this section receives
just compensation for the taking of the property.

(3) The regulations shall, at a minimum, define-- (A) the classes of
significant military equipment requiring demilitarization before disposal;
and (B) what constitutes demilitarization for each class of significant
military equipment.

(f) DEFINITION OF SIGNIFICANT MILITARY EQUIPMENT- In this section, the term
`significant military equipment' means equipment that has a capability
described in clause (i) or (ii) of subsection (e)(2) and-- (1) is a defense
article listed on the United States Munitions List maintained under section
38 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778) that is designated on
that list as significant military equipment; or (2) is designated by the
Secretary of Defense under the regulations prescribed under subsection (e)
as being equipment that it is necessary in the interest of public safety to
demilitarize before disposal by the United States.

SEC. 1063. CONVEYANCES OF EQUIPMENT AND RELATED MATERIALS LOANED TO STATE
AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AS ASSISTANCE FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE TO A USE OR
THREATENED USE OF A WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION.

Section 1412(e) of the Defense Against Weapons of Mass Destruction Act of
1996 (title XIV of Public Law 104-201;
110 Stat. 2718; 50 U.S.C. 2312(e)) is amended by adding at the end the
following new paragraph:

`(5) A conveyance of ownership of United States property to a State or
local government, without cost and without regard to subsection (f) and
title II of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949
(or any other provision of law relating to the disposal of property of the
United States), if the property is equipment, or equipment and related
materials, that is in the possession of the State or local government on
the date of the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2002 pursuant to a loan of the property as assistance under
this section.'.

Call the offices of your two Senators at the following numbers for the US
Capitol switchboard and politely tell them that you will 'Remember in
November' if they vote for S.1438 without SEC. 1062 being removed.

888-449-3511
800-972-3524
877-722-7494
800-456-1414

http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Surveillance/20010919_ata_bill_draft.html

2nd Draft of DoJ Surveillance & Antiterrorism Bill
The Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001 (ATA) (Sep. 19, 2001)
[Originally called the Mobilization Against Terrorism Act (MATA).]

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION
H.R. ______

To combat terrorism and defend the Nation against terrorist acts, and for other purposes.

_______________

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
September ___, 2001

_______________

A BILL
To combat terrorism and defend the Nation against terrorist acts, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SEC. 1. SHORT TITLE.

This act may be cited as the 'Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001.'

SEC. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS.

The following is the table of contents for this Act:

Sec. 1. Short title.

Sec. 2. Table of contents.

Sec. 3. Construction; severability.

Title I--INTELLIGENCE GATHERING

Subtitle A--Electronic Surveillance

Sec. 101. Modification of authorities relating to use of pen registers and trap and trace devices.

Sec. 102. Seizure of voice-mail messages pursuant to warrants.

Sec. 103. Authorized disclosure.

Sec. 104. Savings provision.

Sec. 105. Use of wiretap information from foreign governments.

Sec. 106. Interception of computer trespasser communications.

Sec. 107. Scope of subpoenas for records of electronic communications.

Sec. 108. Nationwide service of search warrants for electronic evidence.

Sec. 109. Clarification of scope.

Sec. 110. Emergency disclosure of electronic communications to protect life and limb.

Subtitle B--Foreign Intelligence Surveillance and Other Information

Sec. 151. Period of orders of electronic surveillance of non-United States persons under foreign intelligence surveillance.

Sec. 152. Multi-point authority.

Sec. 153. Foreign intelligence information.

Sec. 154. Foreign intelligence information sharing.

Sec. 155. Pen register and trap and trace authority.

Sec. 156. Business records.

Sec. 157. Miscellaneous national-security authorities.

Sec. 158. Disclosure of educational records.

Sec. 159. Presidential authority.

Title II--IMMIGRATION

Sec. 201. Definitions relating to terrorism.

Sec. 202. Mandatory detention of suspected terrorists.

Sec. 203. Habeas corpus and judicial review.

Sec. 204. Applicability.

Sec. 205. Multilateral co-operation against terrorists.

Sec. 206. Inter-agency data sharing.

Title III--CRIMINAL JUSTICE

Subtitle A-Substantive Criminal Law

Sec. 301. No statute of limitation for prosecuting terrorism offenses.

Sec. 302. Alternative maximum penalties for terrorism crimes.

Sec. 303. Penalties for terrorist conspiracies.

Sec. 304. Terrorism crimes as RICO predicates.

Sec. 305. Biological weapons.

Sec. 306. Support of terrorism through expert advice or assistance.

Sec. 307. Prohibition against harboring terrorists.

Sec. 308. Post-release supervision of terrorists.

Sec. 309. Definition.

Subtitle B-Criminal Procedure

Sec. 351. Single-jurisdiction search warrants for terrorism.

Sec. 352. Notice.

Sec. 353. DNA identification of terrorists.

Sec. 354. Grand jury matters.

Sec. 355. Extraterritoriality.

Sec. 356. Definition.

Title IV--FINANCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE

Sec. 401. Laundering the proceeds of terrorism.

Sec. 402. Material support for terrorism.

Sec. 403. Assets of terrorist organizations.

Sec. 404. Technical clarification relating to provision of material support to terrorism.

Sec. 405. Disclosure of tax information in terrorism and national-security investigations.

Sec. 406. Restraint of property subject to criminal forfeiture.

Sec. 407. Trade sanctions.

Sec. 408. Extraterritorial jurisdiction.

TITLE V--EMERGENCY AUTHORIZATIONS

Sec. 501. Office of Justice Programs.

Sec. 502. Attorney General's authority to pay rewards.

Sec. 503. Limited authority to pay overtime.

Sec. 504. Secretary of State's authority to pay rewards.

Sec. 505. Assistance to countries co-operating against international terrorism.

SEC. 3. CONSTRUCTION; SEVERABILITY.

Any provision of this Act held to be invalid or unenforceable by its terms, or as applied to any person or circumstance, shall be construed so as to give it the maximum effect permitted by law, unless such holding shall be one of utter invalidity or unenforceability, in which event such provision shall be deemed severable from this Act and shall not affect the remainder thereof or the application of such provision to other persons not similarly situated or to other, dissimilar circumstances.

TITLE I--INTELLIGENCE GATHERING
Subtitle A--Electronic Surveillance

SEC. 101. MODIFICATION OF AUTHORITIES RELATING TO USE OF PEN REGISTERS AND TRAP AND TRACE DEVICES.

(a) GENERAL LIMITATION ON USE BY GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES- Section 3121(c) of title 18, United States Code, is amended-

(1) by inserting 'or trap and trace device' after 'pen register';

(2) by inserting ', routing, addressing,' after 'dialing'; and

(3) by striking 'call processing' and inserting 'the processing and transmitting of wire and electronic communications'.

(b) ISSUANCE OF ORDERS-

(1) IN GENERAL- Subsection (a) of section 3123 of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

'(a) IN GENERAL- (1) Upon an application made under section 3122(a)(1), the court shall enter an ex-parte order authorizing the installation and use of a pen register or trap and trace device anywhere within the United States, if the court finds that the attorney for the Government has certified to the court that the information likely to be obtained by such installation and use is relevant to an ongoing criminal investigation. The order shall, upon service thereof, apply to any person or entity providing wire or electronic communication service in the United States whose assistance may facilitate the execution of the order.

'(2) Upon an application made under section 3122(a)(2), the court shall enter an ex-parte order authorizing the installation and use of a pen register or trap and trace device within the jurisdiction of the court, if the court finds that the State law-enforcement or investigative officer has certified to the court that the information likely to be obtained by such installation and use is relevant to an ongoing criminal investigation.'.

(2) CONTENTS OF ORDER- Subsection (b)(1) of section 3123 of title 18, United States Code, is amended-

(A) in subparagraph (A)--

(i) by inserting 'or other facility' after 'telephone line'; and

(ii) by inserting before the semicolon at the end 'or applied'; and

(B) by striking subparagraph (C) and inserting the following new subparagraph (C):

'(C) the attributes of the communications to which the order applies, including the number or other identifier and, if known, the location of the telephone line or other facility to which the pen register or trap and trace device is to be attached or applied, and, in the case of an order authorizing installation and use of a trap and trace device under subsection (a)(2), the geographic limits of the order; and'.

(3) NON-DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS- Subsection (d)(2) of section 3123 of title 18, United States Code, is amended-

(A) by inserting 'or other facility' after 'the line'; and

(B) by striking ', or who has been ordered by the court' and inserting 'or applied, or who is obligated by the order'.

(c) DEFINITIONS-

(1) COURT OF COMPETENT JURISDICTION- Paragraph (2) of section 3127 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking subparagraph (A) and inserting the following new subparagraph (A):

'(A) any district court of the United States (including a magistrate judge of such a court) or any United States Court of Appeals having jurisdiction over the offense being investigated; or'.

(2) PEN REGISTER - Paragraph (3) of section 3127 of title 18, United States Code, is amended-

(A) by striking 'electronic or other impulses' and all that follows through 'is attached' and inserting 'dialing, routing, addressing, or signaling information transmitted by an instrument or facility from which a wire or electronic communication is transmitted'; and

(B) by inserting 'or process' after 'device' each place it appears.

(3) TRAP AND TRACE DEVICE- Paragraph (4) of section 3127 of title 18, United States Code, is amended-

(A) by inserting 'or process' after 'a device'; and

(B) by striking 'of an instrument' and all that follows through the end and inserting 'or other dialing, routing, addressing, and signaling information reasonably likely to identify the source of a wire or electronic communication;'.

SEC. 102. SEIZURE OF VOICE-MAIL MESSAGES PURSUANT TO WARRANTS.

Title 18, United States Code, is amended-

(1) in section 2510 -

(A) in subsection (1), by striking all the words after 'commerce'; and

(B) in subsection (14), by inserting 'wire or' after 'transmission of'; and

(2) in section 2703(a) and (b)--

(A) by replacing 'Contents of electronic' with 'Contents of wire or electronic' every place it occurs;

(B) by replacing 'contents of an electronic' with 'contents of a wire or electronic' every place it occurs; and

(C) by replacing 'any electronic' with 'any wire or electronic' every place it occurs; and

(D) by replacing 'communication,' with 'communication (including any electronic storage of such wire communication),'.

SEC. 103. AUTHORIZED DISCLOSURE.

Section 2510(7) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding ', and (for purposes only of section 2517) any officer or employee of the executive branch of the federal government' after 'such offenses'.

SEC. 104. SAVINGS PROVISION.

Section 2511(2)(f) of title 18, United States Code, is amended-

(1) by replacing 'or chapter 121' with ', chapter 121, or chapter 206'; and

(2) by replacing 'wire and oral' with 'wire, oral, and electronic'.

SEC. 105. USE OF WIRETAP INFORMATION FROM FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS.

Chapter 119 of title 18, United States Code, is amended-

(1) by adding a new section 2514, as follows:

'2514. Use of extraterritorial interceptions by foreign governments.

'(1) Information lawfully received under United States law from the interception of wire, oral or electronic communications outside the United States by a foreign government or a person acting at the direction thereof-

'(a) without the knowing participation of any officer or employee of the United States or person acting at the direction thereof; or

'(b) with such participation, but under circumstances in which such interception would have been lawful if executed within the United States by such officer, employee, or person,

shall be admissible, and the United States may disclose the information (or derivative information therefrom) in any proceeding held under the authority of the United States or any state or political subdivision thereof.

'(2) Information described in subsection (1) the government alleges could affect the national security shall have no less protection than that afforded by law to confidential informants.'; and

(2) in the chapter analysis, by inserting before the item relating to section 2515 the following:

'2514. Use of extraterritorial interceptions by foreign governments.'.

SEC. 106. INTERCEPTION OF COMPUTER TRESPASSER COMMUNICATIONS.

Chapter 119 of title 18, United States Code, is amended-

(1) in section 2510-

(A) in subsection (17), by striking 'and' at the end;

(B) in subsection (18), by replacing the period with a semi-colon; and

(C) by adding after subsection (18), two new subsections as follows:

'(19) `protected computer' has the meaning set forth in section 1030; and

'(20) `computer trespasser' means a person who accesses a protected computer without authorization and thus has no reasonable expectation of privacy in any communication transmitted to, through, or from the protected computer.'; and

(2) in section 2511(2), by adding after paragraph (h) a new paragraph as follows:

'(i) It shall not be unlawful under this chapter for a person acting under color of law to intercept the wire or electronic communications of a computer trespasser, if-

'(A) the owner or operator of the protected computer authorizes the interception of the computer trespasser's communications on the protected computer;

'(B) the person acting under color of law is lawfully engaged in an investigation;

'(C) the person acting under color of law has reasonable grounds to believe that the contents of the computer trespasser's communications will be relevant to the investigation; and

'(D) such interception does not acquire communications other than those transmitted to or from the computer trespasser.'.

SEC. 107. SCOPE OF SUBPOENAS FOR RECORDS OF ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS.

Section 2703(c)(1)(C) of title 18, United States Code, is amended--

(1) by replacing 'name, address, local and long distance telephone toll billing records, telephone number or other subscriber number or identity, and length of service' with the following:

'(i) name;

'(ii) address;

'(iii) local and long distance telephone connection records, or records of session times and durations;

'(iv) length of service (including start date) and types of service utilized;

'(v) telephone or instrument number or other subscriber number or identity, including any temporarily assigned network address; and

'(vi) means and source of payment (including any credit card or bank account number)'; and

(2) by striking 'and the types of services the subscriber or customer utilized,' after 'of a subscriber to or customer of such service,'.

SEC. 108. NATIONWIDE SERVICE OF SEARCH WARRANTS FOR ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE.

Chapter 121 of title 18, United States Code, is amended-

(1) in section 2703, by striking 'under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure' every place it appears and inserting 'using the procedures described in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure by a court with jurisdiction over the offense under investigation'; and

(2) in section 2711--

(A) in paragraph (1), by striking 'and';

(B) in paragraph (2), by replacing the period with '; and'; and

(C) by adding the following new paragraph at the end:

'(3) the term `court of competent jurisdiction' has the meaning assigned by section 3127, and includes any federal court within that definition, without geographic limitation.'.

SEC. 109. CLARIFICATION OF SCOPE.

Section 2511(2) of title 18, United States Code, as amended by section 106(2) of this Act, is further amended by adding at the end a new paragraph as follows:

'(j) Nothing contained in section 631 of the Act of June 19, 1934 (47 U.S.C. 551) shall be deemed to restrict voluntary or obligatory disclosures of information pursuant to the provisions of this chapter, chapter 121, or chapter 206, except that such disclosures shall not include records revealing customer cable television viewing activity.'.

SEC. 110. EMERGENCY DISCLOSURE OF ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS TO PROTECT LIFE AND LIMB.

(a) Section 2702 of Title 18, United States Code, is amended-

(1) by amending the heading to read, 'Voluntary disclosure of customer communications or records';

(2) in subsection (a)(2)(B) by replacing the period with '; and';

(3) by adding after paragraph (a)(2) a new paragraph as follows:

'(3) a provider of remote computing service or electronic communication service to the public shall not knowingly divulge a record or other information pertaining to a subscriber to or customer of such service (not including the contents of communications covered by subsection (a)(1) or (a)(2)) to any governmental entity.';

(4) in subsection (b) by striking 'Exceptions.-A person or entity' and inserting 'Exceptions for disclosure of communications.-A provider described in subsection (a)';

(5) in paragraph (b)(6)--

(A) in clause (A)(ii), by striking 'or';

(B) in subparagraph (B), by replacing the period with '; or';

(C) by inserting after subparagraph (B) a new subparagraph as follows:

'(C) if the provider reasonably believes that an emergency involving immediate danger of death or serious physical injury to any person requires disclosure of the information without delay.'; and

(6) by adding after subsection (b) a new subsection as follows:

'(c) Exceptions for disclosure of customer records.-A provider described in subsection (a) may divulge a record or other information pertaining to a subscriber to or customer of such service (not including the contents of communications covered by subsection (a)(1) or (a)(2))--

(1) as otherwise authorized in section 2703;

(2) with the lawful consent of the customer or subscriber;

(3) as may be necessarily incident to the rendition of the service or to the protection of the rights or property of the provider of that service;

(4) to a governmental entity, if the provider reasonably believes that an emergency involving immediate danger of death or serious physical injury to any person justifies disclosure of the information; or

(5) to any person other than a governmental entity.'.

(b) Section 2703 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--

(1) by amending the section heading to read, 'Required disclosure of customer communications or records'.

(2) by redesignating subsection (c)(2) as (c)(3);

(3) in subsection (c)(1)--

(A) by striking '(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B) a provider of electronic communication service may' and inserting 'A governmental entity may require a provider of electronic communication service or remote computing service to';

(B) by striking 'covered by subsection (a) or (b) of this section) to any person other than a governmental entity.' and inserting a close parenthesis;

(C) by striking '(B) A provider of electronic communication service or remote computing service shall disclose a record or other information pertaining to a subscriber to or customer of such service (not including the contents of communications covered by subsection (a) or (b) of this section) to a governmental entity';

(D) by redesignating subsection (C) as subsection (c)(2);

(E) by redesignating subsection (B)(i) as (A), (B)(ii) as (B), (B)(iii) as (C), (B)(iv) as (D), and (B)(v) as (E);

(F) in subsection (D) (formerly (B)(iv)) by striking the final period and inserting '; or';

(G) by inserting after subsection (D) (formerly (B)(iv)) the following subsection:

'(F) seeks information pursuant to subparagraph (2).'.

Subtitle B--Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
and Other Information

SEC. 151. PERIOD OF ORDERS OF ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE OF NON-UNITED STATES PERSONS UNDER FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE SURVEILLANCE.

(a) The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 is amended by adding 'or an agent of a foreign power, as defined in section 101(b)(1)(A),'-

(1) in section 105(e)(1) (50 U.S.C. 1805(e)(1)), after 'or (3),'; and

(2) in section 304(d)(1) (50 U.S.C. 1824(d)(1)), after '101(a),'.

(b) Section 304(d)(1) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1824(d)(1)) is amended by replacing 'forty-five' with 'ninety.'

SEC. 152. MULTI-POINT AUTHORITY.

Section 105(c)(2)(B) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1805(c)(2)(B)) is amended by inserting ', or, in circumstances where the Court finds that the actions of the target of the application may have the effect of thwarting the identification of a specified person, such other persons,' after 'specified person'.

SEC. 153. FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION.

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 is amended by replacing 'that the' with 'that a'--

(1) in section 104(a)(7)(B) (50 U.S.C. 1804(a)(7)(B)); and

(2) in section 303(a)(7)(B) (50 U.S.C. 1823(a)(7)(B)).

SEC. 154. FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION SHARING.

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, it shall be lawful for foreign intelligence information obtained as part of a criminal investigation (including, without limitation, information subject to Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and information obtained pursuant to chapter 119 of title 18, United States Code) to be provided to any federal law-enforcement-, intelligence-, protective-, or national-defense personnel, or to any federal personnel responsible for administering the immigration laws of the United States.

SEC. 155. PEN REGISTER AND TRAP AND TRACE AUTHORITY.

Section 402(c) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1842(c)) is amended-

(1) at the end of paragraph (1), by adding 'and';

(2) in paragraph (2)--

(A) by inserting 'from the telephone line to which the pen register or trap and trace device is to be attached, or the communication instrument or device to be covered by the pen register or trap and trace device' after 'obtained'; and

(B) by replacing all the matter after 'General' with a period; and

(3) by striking paragraph (3).

SEC. 156. BUSINESS RECORDS.

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 is amended-

(1) in section 501 (50 U.S.C. 1861), by amending the same to read as follows:

'SS 501. Administrative subpoenas.

'(a) In any investigation to gather foreign intelligence information or an investigation concerning international terrorism, which investigation is being conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation under such guidelines as the Attorney General may approve pursuant to Executive Order 12333 (or a successor order), the Attorney General may, by administrative subpoena, require the production of any tangible things (including books, records, papers, documents, and other items) that are relevant to the investigation.

'(b) A person who, in good faith, produces tangible things under a subpoena issued pursuant to this section shall not be liable to any other person for such production. Such production shall not be deemed to constitute a waiver of any privilege in any other proceeding or context.'; and

(2) by striking section 502 (50 U.S.C. 1862).

SEC. 157. MISCELLANEOUS NATIONAL-SECURITY AUTHORITIES.

(a) Section 2709(b) of title 18, United States Code, is amended--

(1) by inserting 'at Bureau headquarters or Special Agent in Charge in Bureau field offices' before ', may' the first place it occurs;

(2) in paragraph (1)--

(A) by replacing 'the Director' and all that follows through 'Director)' with 'he';

(B) by inserting ', or electronic communication transactional records' after 'toll billing records'; and

(C) by replacing 'made that' and all that follows through the end with 'made that the name, address, length of service, and toll billing records sought are relevant to an authorized foreign counterintelligence investigation; and'; and

(3) in paragraph (2)--

(A) by replacing 'the Director' and all that follows through 'Director)' with 'he'; and

(B) by replacing 'made that' and all that follows through the end with 'made that the information sought is relevant to an authorized foreign counterintelligence investigation.'.

(b) Section 1114(a)(5)(A) of Public Law 95-630 (12 U.S.C. 3414(a)(5)(A)) is amended--

(1) by inserting 'in a position not lower than Deputy Assistant Director at Bureau headquarters or Special Agent in Charge in Bureau field offices' after 'designee'; and

(2) by striking all the matter following 'purposes' up to the period; and

(c) Section 624 of Public Law 90-321 (15 U.S.C. 1681u) is amended--

(1) in subsection (a)--

(A) by inserting 'in a position not lower than Deputy Assistant Director at Bureau headquarters or Special Agent in Charge in Bureau field offices' after 'designee' the first place it appears; and

(B) by replacing 'writing that' and all that follows through the end with 'writing that such information is necessary for the conduct of an authorized foreign counterintelligence investigation.';

(2) in subsection (b)--

(A) by inserting '(in a position not lower than Deputy Assistant Director at Bureau headquarters or Special Agent in Charge in Bureau field offices)' after 'designee' the first place it appears; and

(B) by replacing 'writing that' and all that follows through the end with 'writing that such information is necessary for the conduct of an authorized foreign counterintelligence investigation.'; and

(3) in subsection (c)--

(A) by inserting '(in a position not lower than Deputy Assistant Director at Bureau headquarters or Special Agent in Charge in Bureau field offices)' after 'designee'; and

(B) by replacing 'camera that' and all that follows through 'States.' with 'camera that the consumer report is necessary for the conduct of an authorized foreign counterintelligence investigation.'.

SEC. 158. DISCLOSURE OF EDUCATIONAL RECORDS.

(a) Section 408 of the National Education Statistics Act of 1994 (20 U.S.C. 9007) is amended by adding after subsection (b) a new subsection as follows:

'(c) Without regard to subsections (a) and (b), the Attorney General or the Secretary of Education (or any Federal officer or employee designated by either of them) may, upon determining that so doing can reasonably be expected to assist in investigating or preventing a Federal terrorism offense as defined in section 25 of title 18, United States Code, or domestic terrorism or international terrorism as defined in section 2331 of that title-

'(1) collect, through legal process or as otherwise authorized by law, reports, records, and information (including individually-identifiable information), in the Center's possession; and

(2) for official purposes, retain, disseminate, and use (including as evidence at trial or in other administrative or judicial proceedings) such reports, records, or information as otherwise authorized by law, consistent with such guidelines as the Attorney General may issue to protect confidentiality.

No person furnishing reports, records, or information pursuant to this subsection shall be liable to any other person for furnishing such information.'.

(b) Section 444 of the General Education Provisions Act (20 U.S.C. 1232g), is amended by adding after subsection (i) a new subsection as follows:

'(j) Without regard to subsections (a) through (i) or any provision of State law, the Attorney General (or any Federal officer or employee designated by him) may, upon determining that so doing can reasonably be expected to assist in investigating or preventing a Federal terrorism offense as defined in section 25 of title 18, United States Code, or domestic terrorism or international terrorism as defined in section 2331 of that title-

'(1) collect education records and other information in the possession of an educational agency or institution; and

(2) for official purposes, retain, disseminate, and use (including as evidence at trial or in other administrative or judicial proceedings) such records or other information as otherwise authorized by law, consistent with such guidelines as the Attorney General may issue to protect confidentiality.

No person furnishing records or information pursuant to this subsection shall be liable to any other person for furnishing such information.'.

SEC. 159. PRESIDENTIAL AUTHORITY.

Section 203 of Public Law 95-223 (50 U.S.C. 1702) is amended-

(1) at the end of subparagraph (a)(1)(A), by replacing '; and' with a comma and adding thereafter the following (flush to that subparagraph):

'by any person, or with respect to any property, subject to the jurisdiction of the United States;'

(2) in subparagraph (a)(1)(B)--

(A) by striking 'by any person, or with respect to any property, subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.';

(B) by replacing 'interest;' with 'interest by any person, or with respect to any property, subject to the jurisdiction of the United States; and'; and

(C) by inserting ', block during the pendency of an investigation' after 'investigate';

(3) at the end of paragraph (a)(1), by adding a new subparagraph as follows:

'(C) when the United States is engaged in armed hostilities or has been attacked by a foreign country or foreign nationals, confiscate any property, subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, of any foreign person, foreign organization, or foreign country that he determines has planned, authorized, aided, or engaged in such hostilities or attacks against the United States; and all right, title, and interest in any property so confiscated shall vest, when, as, and upon the terms directed by the President, in such agency or person as the President may designate from time, and upon such terms and conditions as the President may prescribe, such interest or property shall be held, used, administered, liquidated, sold, or otherwise dealt with in the interest of and for the benefit of the United States, and such designated agency or person may perform any and all acts incident to the accomplishment or furtherance of these purposes.'; and

(4) by adding at the end a new subsection (c) as follows:

'(c) Classified information.--In any judicial review of a determination made under this section, if the determination was based on classified information (as defined in section 1(a) of the Classified Information Procedures Act, such information may be submitted to the reviewing court ex parte and in camera.'

Title II--IMMIGRATION
SEC. 201. DEFINITIONS RELATING TO TERRORISM.

The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 is amended-

(a) in Section 212(a)(3) (8 U.S.C. 1182)--

(1) in paragraph (B) -

(A) in clause (i) -

(i) by amending paragraph (IV) to read as follows:

'(IV) is a representative (as defined in clause (iv)) of : (a) a foreign terrorist organization, as designated by the Secretary under section 219, or (b) a political, social or other similar group whose public endorsement of acts of terrorist activity the Secretary has determined undermines U.S. efforts to reduce or eliminate terrorist activities, or';

(ii) in paragraph (V) by inserting 'or' after the comma following '...should have known is a terrorist organization'; and

(iii) by adding new paragraphs (VI) and (VII) to read as follows:

'(VI) has used his or her position of prominence within any country to endorse or espouse terrorist activity, or persuade others to support terrorist activity or a foreign terrorist organization, in a way that the Secretary of State has determined undermines U.S. efforts to reduce or eliminate terrorist activities; or

(VII) is the spouse or child of an alien who is inadmissible under this section, if the activity causing the alien to be found inadmissible occurred within the last 5 years,';

(B) in clause (ii)--

(i) by inserting 'it had been' before 'committed in the United States'; and

(ii) by replacing 'or firearm' with ', firearm, or other weapon or dangerous device';

(C) by amending clause (iii) to read as follows:

'(iii) Engage in terrorist activity defined

'As used in this chapter, the term 'engage in terrorist activity' means, in an individual capacity or as a member of an organization--

'(I) to commit or to incite to commit, under circumstances indicating an intention to cause death or serious bodily injury, an act of terrorist activity;

'(II) to prepare or plan a terrorist activity;

'(III) to gather information on potential targets for terrorist activity;

'(III) to solicit funds or other things of value for terrorist activity or for any terrorist organization;

'(IV) to solicit any individual for membership in a terrorist organization, a government that supports terrorism, or to engage in a terrorist activity; or

'(V) otherwise to commit an act that the actor knows, or reasonably should know, affords material support (including, without limitation, a safe house, transportation, communications, funds, transfer of funds or other material financial benefit, false documentation or identification, weapons (including, without limitation, chemical, biological, and radiological weapons), explosives, or training), to any organization that the actor knows, or reasonably should know, is a terrorist organization, or to any individual whom the actor knows, or reasonably should know, has committed or plans to commit any terrorist activity.

'This clause shall not be construed to encompass any material support the alien affords to an individual who had previously committed terrorist activity if the alien establishes by clear and convincing evidence that such support was afforded only after that individual had permanently and publicly renounced and rejected the use of, and had ceased to commit or support, any terrorist activity.'; and

(D) by adding a new clause after clause (iv) to read as follows:

'(v) Terrorist organization defined

'As used in clause (iii), the term 'terrorist organization' means any organization-

'(I) designated or redesignated under section 219;

'(II) that commits or materially supports, or that has a significant subgroup that commits or materially supports, terrorist activity, regardless of any other activities conducted by the organization or its subgroups;

'(III) that intends to commit or materially support, or that has a significant subgroup that intends to commit or materially support, terrorist activity, regardless of any other activities conducted by the organization or its subgroups; or

'(IV) that has committed or materially supported, or that has a significant subgroup that has committed or materially supported, terrorist activity, regardless of any other activities conducted by the organization or its subgroups, unless the Secretary of State has determined in his sole discretion, after consultation with the Attorney General, that as of a date specified by the Secretary the organization shall not be considered a terrorist organization.'; and

(2) by adding a new subparagraph (F) as follows:

'Any alien who the Secretary of State, after consultation with the Attorney General, or the Attorney General, after consultation with the Secretary of State, determines has been associated with a terrorist organization and intends while in the United States to engage solely, principally, or incidentally in activities that could endanger the welfare, safety, or security of the United States is inadmissible.';

(b) in Section 219(a) (8 U.S.C. 1189(a))--

(A) in subparagraph (1)(B), by inserting 'or terrorism (as defined in section 140(d)(2) of the State Department Authorization Act, Public Law 100-204 (22 U.S.C. 2656f(d)(2)) or retains the capability and intent to engage in terrist activity or terrorism)' after '212(a)(3)(B))';

(B) in subparagraph (1)(C), by inserting 'or terrorism' after 'terrorist activity';

(C) by amending subparagraph (2)(A) to read as follows:

'(A) NOTICE.--

'(i) Seven days before making a designation under this subsection, the Secretary shall, by classified communication, notify the Speaker and Minority Leader of the House of Representatives, the President pro tempore, Majority Leader, and Minority Leader of the Senate, and the members of the relevant committees, in writing, of the intent to designate an organization under this subsection, together with the findings made under paragraph (1) with respect to that organization, and the factual basis therefor.

'(ii) The Secretary shall publish the designation in the Federal Register seven days after providing the notification under clause (i).';

(D) in clause (2)(B)(i), by replacing 'subparagraph (A)' with 'subparagraph (A)(ii)';

(E) in subparagraph (2)(C), by replacing 'paragraph (2)' with 'paragraph (2)(A)(i)';

(F) in subparagraph (3)(B), by replacing 'subsection (c)' with 'subsection (b)';

(G) in subparagraph (4)(B), by inserting after the first sentence the following:

'The Secretary also may redesignate such organization at the end of any 2-year redesignation period (but not sooner than 60 days prior to the termination of such period) for an additional 2-year period upon a finding that the relevant circumstances described in paragraph (1) still exist. Any redesignation shall be effective immediately following the end of the prior 2-year designation or redesignation period unless a different effective date is provided in such redesignation.';

(H) in subparagraph (6)(A),

(i) by inserting 'or a redesignation made under paragraph (4)(B)' after 'paragraph (1)';

(ii) in clause (i), by

(I) inserting 'or redesignation' after 'designation' the first time it appears; and

(II) striking 'of the designation'; and

(iii) in clause (ii), by striking 'of the designation';

(I) in subparagraph (6)(B), by

(i) replacing 'through (4)' with 'and (3)'; and

(ii) inserting the following new sentence at the end:

'Any revocation shall take effect on the date specified in the revocation or upon publication in the Federal Register if no effective date is specified.';

(J) in paragraph (7), by inserting ', or the revocation of a redesignation under paragraph (6),' after 'paragraph (5) or (6)'; and

(K) in paragraph (8), by

(i) replacing 'paragraph (1)(B)' with 'paragraph (2)(B), or if a redesignation under this subsection has become effective under paragraph (4)(B)';

(ii) inserting 'or an alien in a removal proceeding' after 'criminal action'; and

(iii) inserting 'or redesignation' before 'as a defense'.

SEC. 202. MANDATORY DETENTION OF SUSPECTED TERRORISTS.

Section 236 of the Immigration and Nationality Act is amended-

(1) by redesignating subsection (e) as (f) and by inserting before the same the following new subsection:

'(e) Detention of Terrorist Aliens.--

'(1) Custody.--The Attorney General shall take into custody any alien who is certified under paragraph (3).

'(2) Release.--The Attorney General shall maintain custody of any such alien until such alien is removed from the United States. Such custody shall be maintained irrespective of any relief from removal the alien may be eligible for or granted until the Attorney General deems such alien is no longer an alien who may be certified pursuant to paragraph (3).

'(3) Certification.--The Attorney General may certify an alien to be an alien he has reason to believe may commit, further, or facilitate acts described in section 237(a)(4)(A)(i), (A)(iii), or (B), or engage in any other activity that endangers the national security of the United States.'

SEC. 203. HABEAS CORPUS AND JUDICIAL REVIEW.

Except as provided herein and notwithstanding any other provision of law, including section 2241 of title 28, United States Code, no court shall have jurisdiction to review, by habeas corpus petition or otherwise, any action taken, administrative proceeding brought, or determination made to detain an alien under section 202 of this Act; without regard to the place of detention, judicial review of the detention of such an alien is available only by habeas-corpus petition filed in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.

SEC. 204. APPLICABILITY.

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the amendments made by this title (other than the amendments made by sections 205 and 207, which shall apply to offenses committed on or after the date of enactment) shall apply to all aliens, regardless of whether any such aliens entered the United States before or after the date of the enactment of this Act, or whether any relevant activity by any such aliens occurred before or after such date, and shall apply to all past, pending, or future deportation, exclusion, removal, or other immigration proceedings.

SEC. 205. MULTILATERAL CO-OPERATION AGAINST TERRORISTS.

Section 222(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 is amended-

(A) by inserting ': (1)' after 'except that'; and

(B) by inserting the following before the period at the end:

'and (2) the Secretary of State in his discretion and on the basis of reciprocity may provide to a foreign government information in the Department of State's computerized visa lookout database and, when necessary and appropriate, other records covered by this section related to information in the database:

(A) with regard to individual aliens, at any time on a case by case basis for the purpose of preventing, investigating or punishing, acts that would constitute a crime in the United States, including, but not limited to, terrorism or trafficking in controlled substances, persons or illicit weapons; or

(B) with regard to any or all aliens in the database, pursuant to such conditions as he shall establish in an agreement with another government in which that government agrees to use such information and records for the purposes described in paragraph (A) or otherwise to deny visas to persons who would be inadmissible to the United States.'

SEC. 206. INTER-AGENCY DATA SHARING.

(a) Section 105 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1105), is amended-

(1) in the caption by adding 'and Data Exchange' after 'Officers';

(2) by designating all of section 105 as subsection (a);

(3) in subsection (a) as so designated, by inserting the words 'and border' after the word 'internal' in the second place that it appears; and

(4) by adding new subsections (b), (c), and (d) as follows:

'(b) The Attorney General and the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation may provide the Department of State and the Service with access to the criminal history record information contained in the National Crime Information Center's (NCIC) Interstate Identification Index (NCIC-III), Wanted Persons File, and to any other files maintained by the National Crime Information Center that may be mutually agreed upon by the Attorney General and the agency to be provided access for the purpose of determining whether a visa applicant or applicant for admission has a criminal history record indexed in any such file.

(c) For purposes of administering this Section, the Department of State shall, prior to receiving access to National Crime Information Center data, promulgate final regulations to establish the conditions for the use of the information received from the Federal Bureau of Investigation, in order-

(1) to limit the redissemination of such information;

(2) to ensure that such information is used solely to determine whether to issue a visa to an individual;

(3) to ensure the security, confidentiality and destruction of such information; and

(4) to protect any privacy rights of individuals who are subjects of such information.'

(b) Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit such authority as the Attorney General or the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation may have pursuant to other law (and procedures thereunder) to provide access to the criminal history record information contained in the National Crime Information Center's (NCIC) Interstate Identification Index (NCIC-III), or to any other information maintained by the NCIC, to any Federal agency or officer authorized to enforce or administer the immigration laws of the United States for the purpose of such enforcement or administration, upon terms that are consistent with such other law.

Title III--CRIMINAL JUSTICE
Subtitle A-Substantive Criminal Law

SEC. 301. NO STATUTE OF LIMITATION FOR PROSECUTING TERRORISM OFFENSES.

(a) IN GENERAL.- Section 3286 of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

'SS 3286. Terrorism offenses

'Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an indictment may be found or an information instituted for any Federal terrorism offense at any time without limitation.'.

(b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.-The analysis for chapter 213 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by amending the item relating to section 3286 to read as follows:

'3286. Terrorism offenses.'.

(c) APPLICATION.--The amendments made by this section shall apply to the prosecution of any offense committed before, on, or after the date of enactment of this section.

SEC. 302. ALTERNATIVE MAXIMUM PENALTIES FOR TERRORISM CRIMES.

Section 3559 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding after subsection (d) the following new subsection:

'(e) Authorized terms of imprisonment for terrorism crimes. - A person convicted of any Federal terrorism offense may be sentenced to imprisonment for any term of years or for life, notwithstanding any maximum term of imprisonment specified in the law describing the offense. The authorization of imprisonment under this subsection is supplementary to, and does not limit, the availability of any other penalty authorized by the law describing the offense, including the death penalty, and does not limit the applicability of any mandatory minimum term of imprisonment, including any mandatory life term, provided by the law describing the offense.'.

SEC. 303. PENALTIES FOR TERRORIST CONSPIRACIES.

Chapter 113B of title 18, United States Code, is amended-

(1) by inserting after section 2332b the following:

'SS 2332c. Attempts and conspiracies

'Any person who attempts or conspires to commit any Federal terrorism offense shall be subject to the same penalties as those prescribed for the offense, the commission of which was the object of the attempt or conspiracy.'; and

(2) in the analysis for the chapter, by inserting after the item relating to section 2332b the following:

'2332c. Attempts and conspiracies.'.

SEC. 304. TERRORISM CRIMES AS RICO PREDICATES.

Section 1961(1) of title 18, United States Code, is amended-

(1) by striking 'or (F)' and inserting '(F)'; and

(2) by replacing 'financial gain;' with 'financial gain, or (G) any act that is indictable as a Federal terrorism offense;'.

SEC. 305. BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS.

(a) Chapter 10 of title 18, United States Code is amended-

(1) in section 175-

(A) in subsection (b)-

(i) by striking, 'section, the'and inserting 'section - (1) the';

(ii) by striking 'does not include' and inserting 'includes';

(iii) by inserting 'other than' after 'system for'; and

(iv) by striking 'purposes.' and inserting the following: 'purposes, and (2) the terms `biological agent' and `toxin' do not encompass any biological agent or toxin that is in its naturally-occurring environment, if the biological agent or toxin has not been cultivated, collected, or otherwise extracted from its natural source.';

(B) by redesignating subsection (b) as (c); and

(C) after subsection (a), by adding a new subsection as follows:

'(b) Additional offense.-Whoever knowingly possesses any biological agent, toxin, or delivery system of a type or in a quantity that, under the circumstances, is not reasonably justified by a prophylactic, protective or other peaceful purpose, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both. Knowledge of whether the type or quantity of any biological agent, toxin, or delivery system is reasonably justified by a peaceful purpose is not an element of the offense.';

(2) after section 175a, by adding a new section as follows:

'SS 175b. Possession by restricted persons

'(a) No person described in section 922(g) shall ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any biological agent or toxin, or receive any biological agent or toxin that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, if the biological agent or toxin is listed as a `select agent' in subsection (j) of section 72.6 of title 42, Code of Federal Regulations, pursuant to section 511(d)(1) of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-132), and is not exempted under subsection (h) of such section 72.6, or appendix A of part 72 of such title; except that the term 'select agent' does not include any such biological agent or toxin that is in its naturally-occurring environment, if the biological agent or toxin has not been cultivated, collected, or otherwise extracted from its natural source. The prohibition of this section shall also apply to an alien (other than an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence) who is a national of a country as to which the Secretary of State, pursuant to section 6(j) of the Export Administration Act (50 U.S.C. App. 2405(j)), section 620A of chapter 1 of part M of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2371), or section 40(d) of chapter 3 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2780(d)), has made a determination (that remains in effect) that such country has repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism.

'(b) Whoever knowingly violates this section shall be fined as provided in this title, imprisoned not more than ten years, or both, but the prohibition contained in this section shall not apply with respect to any duly authorized governmental activity under title V of the National Security Act of 1947.'; and

(3) in the chapter analysis, by inserting after the item relating to section 175a the following:

'175b. Possession by restricted persons.'.

(b) The Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 is amended by adding a new subsection after subsection 511 (42 U.S.C. 262 note) as follows:

'SS 511A. Regulation of biological agents posing national-security threat

'(a) IN GENERAL.--

'(1) LIST OF AGENTS POSING SECURITY THREAT.--The Secretary shall, through regulations promulgated under subsection (d), establish and maintain a list of those biological agents listed pursuant to section 511(d)(1) that he determines to be a national-security threat.

'(2.) CRITERIA.--In determining whether to include an agent on the list under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall-

'(A) consider the criteria specified in section 511(d)(1)(B)(i), and any other criteria that he determines to be appropriate; and

'(B) consult with scientific, intelligence, and military experts representing appropriate professional groups.

'(b) REGULATION OF BIOLOGICAL AGENTS POSING SECURITY THREAT.--The Secretary shall, through regulations promulgated under subsection (d), provide for the establishment and enforcement of standards and procedures governing the possession, use, and transfer of agents listed under subsection (a)(1) designed to protect public safety and national security, including safeguards to prevent access to such agents for use in domestic terrorism or international terrorism or for any other criminal purpose.

'(c) CIVIL MONEY PENALTIES.--A violation of a requirement imposed by regulation promulgated under this section shall be subject to a civil money penalty of up to $250,000.

'(d) REGULATIONS.--The Secretary shall promulgate regulations to carry out this section. The initial regulations implementing this section shall be issued as interim final regulations.

'(e) INAPPLICABILITY OF PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT.--The provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. ch. 35) shall not apply to this section.

SEC. 306. SUPPORT OF TERRORISM THROUGH EXPERT ADVICE OR ASSISTANCE.

Section 2339A of title 18, United States Code, is amended-

(1) in subsection (a)--

(A) by striking 'a violaton' and all that follows through '49' and inserting 'any Federal terrorism offense'; and

(B) by replacing 'violation,' with 'offense,'; and

(2) in subsection (b), by inserting 'expert advice or assistance,' after 'training,'.

SEC. 307. PROHIBITION AGAINST HARBORING TERRORISTS.

Section 792 of title 18, United States Code, is amended-

(1) by inserting 'or a Federal terrorism offense,' before 'shall be fined'; and

(2) by inserting at the end: 'There is extraterritorial Federal jurisdiction over any violation (including, without limitation, conspiracy or attempt) of this section. A violation of this section may be prosecuted in any Federal judicial district in which the underlying offense was committed, or in any other Federal judicial district as provided by law.'.

SEC. 308. POST-RELEASE SUPERVISION OF TERRORISTS.

Section 3583 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

'(j) Supervised release terms for terrorism offenses. - Notwithstanding subsection (b), the authorized terms of supervised release for any Federal terrorism offense are any term of years or life.'.

SEC. 309. DEFINITION.

(a) Chapter 1 of title 18, United States Code, is amended-

(1) by adding after section 24 a new section as follows:

'SS 25. Federal terrorism offense defined

'As used in this title, the term `Federal terrorism offense' means a violation of, or an attempt or conspiracy to violate-

'(a) section 32 (relating to destruction of aircraft or aircraft facilities), 37 (relating to violence at international airports), 81 (relating to arson within special maritime and territorial jurisdiction), 175, 175b (relating to biological weapons), 229 (relating to chemical weapons), 351 (relating to congressional, cabinet, and Supreme Court assassination, kidnapping, and assault), 792 (relating to harboring terrorists), 831 (relating to nuclear materials), 842(m) or (n) (relating to plastic explosives), 844(e) (relating to certain bombings), 844(f) or (i) (relating to arson and bombing of certain property), 930(c), 956 (relating to conspiracy to injure property of a foreign government), 1030(a)(1), (a)(4), (a)(5)(A), or (a)(7) (relating to protection of computers), 1114 (relating to protection of officers and employees of the United States), 1116 (relating to murder or manslaughter of foreign officials, official guests, or internationally protected persons), 1203 (relating to hostage taking), 1361 (relating to injury of Government property or contracts), 1362 (relating to destruction of communication lines, stations, or systems), 1363 (relating to injury to buildings or property within special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States), 1366 (relating to destruction of an energy facility), 1751 (relating to Presidential and Presidential staff assassination, kidnapping, and assault), 1992, 2152 (relating to injury of fortifications, harbor defenses, or defensive sea areas), 2155 (relating to destruction of national defense materials, premises, or utilities), 2156 (relating to production of defective national defense materials, premises, or utilities), 2280 (relating to violence against maritime navigation), 2281 (relating to violence against maritime fixed platforms), 2332 (relating to certain homicides and other violence against United States nationals occurring outside of the United States), 2332a (relating to use of weapons of mass destruction), 2332b (relating to acts of terrorism transcending national boundaries), 2332c, 2339A (relating to providing material support to terrorists), 2339B (relating to providing material support to terrorist organizations), or 2340A (relating to torture);

'(b) section 236 (relating to sabotage of nuclear facilities or fuel) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2284);

'(c) section 601 (relating to disclosure of identities of covert agents) of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 421); or

'(d) section 46502 (relating to aircraft piracy), section 46504 (relating to interference with a flight crew), section 46505 (relating to carrying a weapon or explosive on aircraft), section 46506 (relating to application of certain criminal laws to acts on aircraft), or section 60123(b) (relating to destruction of interstate gas or hazardous liquid pipeline facility) of title 49.'; and

(2) in the chapter analysis, by inserting after the item relating to section 24 the following:

'25. Federal terrorism offense defined.'.

(b) Section 2332b(g)(5)(B) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking 'is a violation' and all that follows through 'title 49' and inserting 'is a Federal terrorism offense'.

Subtitle B-Criminal Procedure
SEC. 351. SINGLE-JURISDICTION SEARCH WARRANTS FOR TERRORISM.

Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure is amended by inserting after 'executed' the following: 'and (3) in an investigation of domestic terrorism or international terrorism (as defined in section 2331 of title 18, United States Code), by a federal magistrate judge in any district in which activities related to the terrorism may have occurred, for a search of property or for a person within or outside the district'.

SEC. 352. NOTICE.

Section 3103a of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: 'With respect to any issuance of a warrant or court order under this section, or any other law or rule, to search for and seize any property or material that constitutes evidence of a criminal offense in violation of the laws of the United States, any notice required, or that may be required, to be given may be delayed pursuant to the standards, terms, and conditions set forth in section 2705, unless otherwise expressly provided by statute.'.

SEC. 353. DNA IDENTIFICATION OF TERRORISTS.

Section 3(d)(1) of the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 14135a(d)(1)) is amended-

(1) by redesignating subparagraph (G) as subparagraph (H); and

(2) by inserting after subparagraph (F) the a new subparagraph as follows:

'(G) Any Federalism terrorism offense (as defined in section 25 of title 18, United States Code).'.

SEC. 354. GRAND JURY MATTERS.

Rule 6(e)(3)(A) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure is amended-

(1) by striking 'and' at the end of subdivision (i);

(2) by replacing the period at the end of subdivision (ii) with '; and'; and

(3) by inserting after subdivision (ii) the following:

'(iii) federal law-enforcement-, intelligence-, protective-, or national-defense personnel, or any federal personnel responsible for administering the immigration laws of the United States, where the matters pertain to international terrorism or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331 of title 18, United States Code), or a matter of national security.'.

SEC. 355. EXTRATERRITORIALITY.

Chapter 113B of title 18, United States Code, is amended-

(1) in the heading, by striking 'Exclusive';

(2) by inserting 'There is extraterritorial Federal jurisdiction over any Federal terrorism offense and any offense under this chapter.' at the beginning; and

(3) in the chapter analysis, by striking 'Exclusive' in the item relating to section 2338.

SEC. 356. DEFINITION.

Section 7 of Title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding the following at the end thereof:

'(9) With respect to offenses committed by or against a United States national, as defined in Section 1203(c) of this title, (a) the premises of United States diplomatic and consular missions in foreign states including the buildings or parts of buildings and the land ancillary thereto, irrespective of ownership, used for purposes of the missions, and (b) the private residences and the land ancillary thereto, irrespective of ownership, used for purposes of the missions, and (c) the private residences and the land ancillary thereto in foreign states, irrespective of ownership, of the head of diplomatic and consular mission and other United States nationals assigned to diplomatic missions and consular missions.'

Title IV--FINANCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE
SEC. 401. LAUNDERING THE PROCEEDS OF TERRORISM.

Section 1956(c)(7)(D) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting 'or 2339B' after '2339A'.

SEC. 402. MATERIAL SUPPORT FOR TERRORISM.

Section 2339A of title 18, United States Code, is amended-

(1) in subsection (a), by inserting 'A violation of this section may be prosecuted in any Federal judicial district in which the underlying offense was committed, or in any other Federal judicial district as provided by law.' at the end; and

(2) in subsection (b), by replacing 'or other financial securities' with 'or monetary instruments or financial securities'.

SEC. 403. ASSETS OF TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS.

Section 981(a)(1) of title 18, United States Code, is amended after paragraph (F) by adding the following new paragraph:

'(G) All assets, foreign or domestic--

'(i) of any person, entity or organization engaged in planning or perpetrating any act of domestic terrorism or international terrorism (as defined in section 2331) against the United States, citizens or residents of the United States, or their property, and all assets, foreign or domestic, affording any person a source of influence over any such entity or organization;

'(ii) acquired or maintained by any person for the purpose of supporting, planning, conducting, or concealing an act of domestic terrorism or international terrorism (as defined in section 2331) against the United States, citizens or residents of the United States, or their property; or

'(iii) derived from, involved in, or used or intended to be used to commit any act of domestic terrorism or international terrorism (as defined in section 2331) against the United States, citizens or residents of the United States, or their property.'.

SEC. 404. TECHNICAL CLARIFICATION RELATING TO PROVISION OF MATERIAL SUPPORT TO TERRORISM.

No provision of title IX of Public Law 106-387 shall be understood to limit or otherwise affect section 2339A or 2339B of title 18, United States Code.

SEC. 405. DISCLOSURE OF TAX INFORMATION IN TERRORISM AND NATIONAL-SECURITY INVESTIGATIONS.

Section 6103 of title 26, United States Code, is amended -

(1) in paragraph (i)(3), by adding a new subparagraph after subparagraph (B) as follows:

'(C) Response to Terrorist Incidents and Threats.- The Secretary may disclose returns or return information to the extent necessary to assist officers or employees of any Federal agency involved in the response to or the investigation of terrorist incidents, threats, or activities; the Federal agency may redisclose information received pursuant to this paragraph to State or local law-enforcement officials who are part of a joint investigative team with the Federal agency.';

(2) in subsection (i), by adding a new paragraph after paragraph (6), as follows:

'(7) Information Concerning Terrorist Activities.--The Secretary may disclose returns and return information, upon a particularized request signed personally by an individual in the Department of Justice or the Department of the Treasury appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate, or a member of the Senior Executive Service who is responsible for the collection of analysis of intelligence and counter-intelligence information concerning terrorist organizations and activities. Information disclosed under this paragraph may be disclosed to employees of the Department of Justice and the Department of the Treasury personally and directly engaged in (and solely for their use in) the collection or analysis of intelligence and counterintelligence information concerning terrorist organizations or activities. Information disclosed under this paragraph may be disclosed to other United States inteligence agencies when relevant to their analysis of intelligence and counter-intelligence information concerning terrorist organizations and activities, and thereafter the information so disclosed may be used by such agencies only in accordance with Executive Order 12333 (or successor order).'; and

(3) by adding a new paragraph (a)(11) as follows:

'The term `terrorism' means international terrorism or domestic terrorism as those terms are defined in section 2331 of Title 18, United States Code.'

SECTION 406. RESTRAINT OF PROPERTY SUBJECT TO CRIMINAL FORFEITURE.

Section 413(e)(1) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. SS 853(e)(1)) is amended by inserting 'or (p)' after '(a)'.

SECTION 407. TRADE SANCTIONS.

The Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000 (title IX of H.R. 5426, as enacted by section 1(a) of Public Law 106-387) is amended-

(1) in section 902(6)--

(A) by striking 'or' at the end of subparagraph (A);

(B) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (B) and inserting '; or'; and

(C) by adding at the end thereof the following new subparagraph:

'(C) a statute, executive order, or regulation imposing such a prohibition, restriction, or condition with respect to a foreign entity designated by the United States in connection with terrorism, narcotics trafficking, or the proliferation of missiles or weapons of mass destruction.';

(2) in section 902(7)--

(A) by striking 'or' at the end of subparagraph (A);

(B) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (B) and inserting '; or'; and

(C) by adding at the end thereof the following new subparagraph:

'(C) a statute, executive order, or regulation imposing such a prohibition, restriction, or condition with respect to a foreign entity designated by the United States in connection with terrorism, narcotics trafficking, or the proliferation of missiles or weapons of mass destruction.';

(3) by amending section 904(2)(C) to read as follows:

'(C) used to facilitate the design, development, or production of missiles or weapons of mass destruction.';

(4) in section 906(a)(1)--

(A) by inserting ', the Taliban or the territory of Afghanistan controlled by the Taliban,' after 'Cuba'; and

(B) by inserting ', or in the territory of Afghanistan controlled by the Taliban,' after 'within such country'; and

(5) in section 906(a)(2), by inserting ', or to any other entity in Syria or North Korea' after 'Korea'.

SECTION 408. EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION.

Section 1029 of Title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end a new paragraph (g) as follows:

'(g) Any person who, outside the jurisdiction of the United States, engages in any act that, if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States, would constitute an offense under subsections (a) or (b) of this section, shall be subject to the fines, penalties, imprisonment and forfeiture enumerated in this title if-

(1) the offense involves an access device issued, owned, managed, or controlled by a financial institution, account issuer, credit card system member, or other entity within the jurisdiction of the United States; and

(2) the person transports, delivers, conveys, transfers to or through, or otherwise stores, secretes, or holds within the jurisdiction of the United States, any article used to assist in the commission o the offense or the proceeds of such offense or property derived therefrom.'.

Title V--EMERGENCY AUTHORIZATIONS
SEC. 501. OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS.

(a) In connection with the airplane hijackings and terrorist acts (including, without limitation, any related search, rescue, relief, assistance, or other similar activities) that occurred on September 11, 2001, in the United States, amounts transferred to the Crime Victims Fund from the Executive Office of the President or funds appropriated to the President shall not be subject to any limitation on obligations from amounts deposited or available in the Fund.

(b) Section 112 of title I of section 101(b) of division A of Public Law 105-277 and section 108(a) of appendix A of Public Law 106-113 (113 Stat. 1501A-20) are amended- (1) after 'that Office', each place it occurs, by inserting '(including, notwithstanding any contrary provision of law (unless the same should expressly refer to this section), any organization that administers any program established in title 1 of Public Law 90-351)'; and (2) by inserting 'functions, including any' after 'all'.

(c) Section 1404B(b) of the Victim Compensation and Assistance Act is amended after 'programs' by inserting ', to victim service organizations, to public agencies (including Federal, State, or local governments), and to non-governmental organizations that provide assistance to victims of crime,'.

(d) Section 1 of H.R. 2882 of the 107th Congress as enacted is amended in section 1(a) by striking ', (d),', by inserting '(containing sufficient information to permit a proper distribution pursuant to such section 1201(a), where relevant)' before 'by a', and by replacing all the matter after 'certification,' with 'benefits under such section 1201(a) and the first year's benefits under such section 1201(b).'.

SEC. 502. ATTORNEY GENERAL'S AUTHORITY TO PAY REWARDS.

No reward offered by the Attorney General in connection with hijackings or terrorist acts shall be subject to any per- or aggregate reward spending limitation established by law, unless the same should expressly refer to this section, and no reward paid pursuant to any such offer shall count toward any such aggregate reward spending limitation.

SEC. 503. LIMITED AUTHORITY TO PAY OVERTIME.

The matter under the headings 'Immigration And Naturalization Service: Salaries and Expenses, Enforcement And Border Affairs' and 'Immigration And Naturalization Service: Salaries and Expenses, Citizenship And Benefits, Immigration And Program Direction' in the Department of Justice Appropriations Act, 2001 (as enacted into law by Appendix B (H.R. 5548) of Public Law 106-553 (114 Stat. 2762A-58 to 2762A-59)) is amended by striking the following each place it occurs: 'Provided, That none of the funds available to the Immigration and Naturalization Service shall be available to pay any employee overtime pay in an amount in excess of $30,000 during the calendar year beginning January 1, 2001:'.

SEC. 504. SECRETARY OF STATE'S AUTHORITY TO PAY REWARDS.

Section 36 of the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956 (P.L. 885, August 1, 1956; 22 USC 2708) is amended -

(1) in section (b) -

(a) by deleting 'or' at the end of paragraph (4);

(b) by adding the following at the end of subsection (5) 'including by dismantling an organization in whole or significant part; or'; and

(c) by adding a new paragraph (6) as follows:

'the identification or location of an individual who holds a key leadership position in a terrorist organization.'

(2) in section (d), by striking paragraphs (2) and (3) and renumbering paragraph (4) accordingly;

(3) in section (e)(1), by striking '$5,000,000' and inserting in lieu thereof '$10,000,000, except as personally authorized by the Secretary of State if he determines that offer or payment of an award of a larger amount is important to the national interests of the United States.'

SEC. 505. ASSISTANCE TO COUNTRIES CO-OPERATING AGAINST INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM.

(a) The President may provide assistance or take any other action, sell or authorize the export of defense articles or defense services, or issue credit, credit guarantees or extend other financial assistance, under the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, the Arms Export Control Act, the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945, or other provisions of law, notwithstanding any other provision of law, if to do so is important to United States efforts to respond to, deter or prevent acts of international terrorism or other actions threatening international peace and security. The authority of this paragraph may be used in Fiscal Years 2002 through 2007.

(b) Section 571 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 is amended as follows:

(1) After 'law,' strike 'that restricts assistance to foreign countries, other than sections 502B and 620A of this Act,'; and

(2) After 'assistance', strike 'to foreign countries'.

(c) Section 582 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 is amended as follows: after 'law', delete 'other than section 502B or 620A of this Act,'.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 20:10:42 (EDT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: salsa
Subject: Told us WHAT?
Message:
Hope you didn't type that all yourself, Silvia. What's your point?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 04:29:19 (EDT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: All
Subject: Melborne - read this
Message:
Saddam's Cruel
Drug Scam

And don't say bullshit u dork.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 11:25:09 (EDT)
From: CW
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: Re: Melborne - read this
Message:
Do you think if it was your Four year old Son or Daughter that was dying in some shitty hell-hole in downtown Baghdad, that THIS would make you feel any better? Of course Saddam is a murdering freak. But does that justify the West committing Genocide against a whole generation of Iraqi's?. The problem is closing down your senses to the truth. In the long run the Warlords dont really matter. It is the precious human existence that is continually thrown out on the garbage dump of life. We have a red neck rascist Dickhead for a PM for at least another month.Fuck em all I say. There is no difference between acts of terrorism and santioned murder of innocents. Murder is murder. Life -that is the gift. Who are all these fucks who take the liberty of playing God? Come on ;now tell me who is RIGHT?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 21:42:45 (EDT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: CW
Subject: very touchy
Message:
am crying. Please stop.

No it doesn't justify genocide. No, some poor 6000 souls died for what?

Yes, I closed my senses a long time ago, because I couldn't deal with things. How do you deal with seeing someone hanging from a street light post with people tugging at his legs, or another at the entrance of a University or or or .

There is no truth in politics. The winner is he who achives his goal.

As for Howard, I agrre, he is a red neck bastard. He is probably sitting back in his exective chair with Coustello rubbing his hands not believing his luck as to gods' blessing for blowing up the wtc. And the fuckin people support him. Well that is the truth.

As for the rest, I don't know, but they can fuck off too.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 00:02:35 (EDT)
From: CW
Email: None
To: salam
Subject: Re: very touchy
Message:
Yeah , well I've seen similar things in my lifespan Salam. But I refuse to allow myself to be de-sensitised by it.If people actually said no, fuck-off Cowboys and Warlords, enough is enough, especially in so called civilised societies, we may well put an end to it once and for all. 'Hell No , We wont GO' ???? Ahh but we all went to sleep didn't we?
As for Howard (Duck!!), he and his cronies are just about to re- install the White Australia policy. He may well be Arthur Calwell's love child! If he get's back in the shit will surely hit the fan here. There are enough people who would say 'Piss off Big Ears!' to make their term of Goverment untenable.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 13:06:34 (EDT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: CW
Subject: There is a difference
Message:
If a British national declaring hatred for Muslims, hijacked a plane and crashed it into the main market in Bagdad, killing 6,000 civilians, you'd expect them to get pretty angry and declare holy war against Britain. Any British nationals in Iraq would almost certainly be imprisoned or made to leave the country.

When Muslim terrorists crash planes into American buildings what is the result? Americans and Brits go round saying that it's wrong to react violently to such an act. Americans and Brits say that Muslims are not the problem and they should be respected and we shouldn't wage war against innocent civilians. We even send aid to Afghanistan who we suspect harbours a terrorist leader.

Would Saddam Hussain send food aid to Britain if we killed 6,000 Muslims in Bagdad. Would he act carefully and try to avert a nasty war such as President Bush has done? Would he carefully try to avoid civilian casualties with any military response?

So there is a difference and the Muslim terrorists are taking advantage of the West's high value it puts on human life. These are the terrorists who stabbed and cut the throats of female airline stewardesses. How does America react? I'd say America's reaction is virtually saintlike.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 21:56:20 (EDT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: get of it
Message:
What is the cost of displaying few million and stopping a whole economy for the sake of saving face [ which what this is all about ]?

A fucking $100 million dollars. What a joke, and it's happining in front of everyone.

Where are the peace loving artists? a song or two can raise manytimes that amount.

Hey mum, do we have bread? no dear, no one sang today.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 07:26:46 (EDT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: salam
Subject: Six out of ten
Message:
A good post from you but I have no idea what it's about or how it relates to my post. But you did better than Catweasel.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 08:58:41 (EDT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: I want more
Message:
6? is that it. I want a review. This is at least 8.

I must have had a bad morning or something?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 19:02:50 (EDT)
From: CW
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: Re: There is a difference
Message:
That ,Dave is an intellectual argument. Idont take issue with what you are saying. What I take issue with is where our consciousness has gone. Strange as it may be for some here to accept I am a pacifist. Any 6ooo people dying anywhere without cause is a crime against humanity. It's easy to create the demons. Especially when the press is so eager to sell (on either side). And really Dave , there is no Dark side of the Moon? So little time;how easy we forget.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 16:56:59 (EDT)
From: CW
Email: None
To: CW
Subject: 10%ers
Message:
The words to the song , the sentiments rxpressed , the times and how our thinking has changed?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 02, 2001 at 07:31:45 (EDT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: CW
Subject: Four out of ten
Message:
It made sense until the last two sentences.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 04:47:41 (EDT)
From: Mel Bourne
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: Thanks Salam, interesting.....rne - read this
Message:
Thanks, Salam

Again, I have not denied that black marketeering goes on, merely that it has not been mentioned in the UN reports, and so may not be as extensive or widespread as you imply. Also, see my apology below in response to your 'bullshit' post!

Mel

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 21:28:18 (EDT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: Mel Bourne
Subject: Re: Thanks Salam, interesting.....rne - read this
Message:
No overstatin nothin.

In one case 7 Greeks that did smuggling for Saddam were in Jordan. Saddam thought that they were ripping him off so he sent them his hounchos, shot six. They beat the crap out of the seventh which was a woman and left her to tell the story and as an example to anyone thinking too much. Many people know that he runs his own mafia, but these are things that the UN does't really want to dirty their reports with.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 13:30:24 (EDT)
From: Francesca
Email: None
To: Mel Bourne
Subject: I don't have the articles ...
Message:
... in front of me but it was reported in the mainstream press in the past week that humanitarian aid (i.e. food, medical supplies, etc.) was not getting to the Afghanis because the Taliban government was confiscating it. It was also reported that the relief organizations were going to send more food and supplies anyway.

The same thing has happened in Somalia, and every other ding dang place run by dictators, terrorists and warlords for many, many years.

People are starving because of politics, not merely for lack of food, and not merely for lack of wealthy nations' caring. And these cuthroat leaders have allowed citizens of their own countries, people of their own ancestry and blood, to die or live life on the brink of starvation in order to feed their troops, and to keep their own people weak enough that they will be subject to their will.

I am not making excuses for all of the horrible bombings and other things that the US, the Brits, NATO and whomever has done. But the fact remains that, in general, people under cruel totalitarian governments run by dictators, military rule, warlords and terrorists have way more to fear from people of their own blood and nationality.

Bests,

Francesca

Return to Index -:- Top of Index