Intelligence Officers Revolt, Thousands of Documents Reclassified, Torturers Go Free, Aspartame Concerns
Cover-up News Summary
February 27, 2006
Below are one-paragraph excerpts of important news articles you may have missed. Each excerpt is taken verbatim from the major media website listed at the link provided. If any link fails to function, click here. These news articles include revealing information on an intelligence officers revolt, 55,000 documents being reclassified, torturers going free, concerns about aspartame, and more. By choosing to educate ourselves now and to spread the word, we can and will build a brighter future.
MI5 rebels expose Tube bomb cover-up
February 26, 2006, London Times
MI5 is facing an internal revolt by officers alarmed about intelligence failures and the lack of resources to fight Islamic terrorism. To illustrate their concern, agents have leaked more topsecret documents to The Sunday Times because they want a public inquiry into the "missed intelligence" leading up to the July attacks in London. They believe ministers have withheld information from the public about what the security services knew about the suspects before the bombing of July 7 and the abortive attacks of July 21. The documents include an admission by John Scarlett, head of SIS, the secret intelligence service (also known as MI6), that one of the July 21 suspects was tracked on a trip to Pakistan just months before the attempted bombings. MI5, which is responsible for national security, allowed the July 21 suspect to travel to Pakistan after he was detained and interviewed at a British airport. It stopped monitoring him because it said "the Pakistani authorities assessed that he was doing nothing of significance". They are critical of Blair, who has ruled out an inquiry saying it would distract the security services from fighting terrorism. The assessment echoes a decision by MI5 to halt surveillance on two of the July 7 bombers 16 months before the attacks. Both were filmed and taped by MI5 agents as they met two men allegedly plotting to carry out a terrorist attack in England.
Abusive G.I.'s Not Pursued, Survey Finds
February 23, 2006, New York Time/Associated Press
The longest sentence for any member of the American military linked to a torture-related death of a detainee in Iraq or Afghanistan has been five months, a human rights group reported Wednesday. In only 12 of 34 cases has anyone been punished for the confirmed or suspected killings, said the group, Human Rights First, which is based in New York and Washington. Beyond those cases, in almost half of 98 known detainee deaths since 2002, the cause was never announced or was reported as undetermined. "In dozens of cases documented here, grossly inadequate reporting, investigation and follow-through have left no one at all responsible for homicides and other unexplained deaths," it said in the report, based on military court records, news reports and other sources. The Pentagon says it conscientiously investigates such deaths. When asked Wednesday for a status report on investigations and prosecutions in individual cases of abuse, the Pentagon said it could not offer a comprehensive compilation because the information was too scattered. Army lawyers at the Pentagon do not "have access to the information because other Army commands have the documents," Maj. Wayne Marotto, a spokesman, said.
U.S. Reclassifies Many Documents in Secret Review
February 21, 2006, New York Times
In a seven-year-old secret program at the National Archives, intelligence agencies have been removing from public access thousands of historical documents that were available for years, including some already published by the State Department. The restoration of classified status to more than 55,000 previously declassified pages began in 1999, when the Central Intelligence Agency and five other agencies objected to what they saw as a hasty release of sensitive information after a 1995 declassification order signed by President Bill Clinton. It accelerated after the Bush administration took office and especially after the 2001 terrorist attacks. But because the reclassification program is itself shrouded in secrecy – governed by a still-classified memorandum that prohibits the National Archives even from saying which agencies are involved – it continued virtually without outside notice until December. Historians say the program is removing material that can do no conceivable harm to national security. They say it is part of a marked trend toward greater secrecy under the Bush administration, which has increased the pace of classifying documents, slowed declassification and discouraged the release of some material under the Freedom of Information Act. "I think this is a travesty," said Dr. Nelson. "I think the public is being deprived of what history is really about: facts."
Note: More on this in the National Security Archive: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB179
The basics of alternative 9-11 theories
February 21, 2006, Village Voice (alternative NY newspaper - liberal)
Operation Northwoods. This 1962 white paper from the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff suggested possible justifications for a war against Cuba, including a never executed idea in which the CIA would detonate a drone aircraft to make it look like Fidel Castro had shot down an American passenger plane. Project for the New American Century [PNAC]. As evidence of the motives behind a government-planned 9-11, theorists point to one 28-word passage in a September 2000 [PNAC] report written with help from the likes of Scooter Libby and Paul Wolfowitz: "The process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event–like a new Pearl Harbor. "Theorists point to Attorney General John Ashcroft's decision to stop flying commercial [planes] in the summer of 2001, as well as a San Francisco Chronicle report that Mayor Willie Brown received a warning of 9-11, as evidence that some people had foreknowledge of the attack. World Trade Center 7. This building–the last to fall on 9-11–is key to all controlled-demolition theories. Its sudden fall onto its own footprint, and developer Larry Silverstein's reference on TV to telling the FDNY to "pull it," are seen as evidence that WTC7 was rigged to fall. Meanwhile, a convincing official explanation hasn't exactly been forthcoming.
Note: We generally avoid partisan sources, but as so few are reporting the vital questions around 9-11, we've included this article. You can find another informative article from the same newspaper on the same day at http://villagevoice.com/news/0608,murphy,72254,6.html. For our highly reliable, verifiable information on the 9-11 cover-up, see https://www.WantToKnow.info/911information. For an amazing free video with testimony from dozens of survivors on all of this, see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psP_9RE0V2I
The suppression of Able Danger
February 18, 2006, Toledo Blade
Mr. Kleinsmith and the two colleagues who testified with him in [a House Armed Services Committee] open session are convinced that had the information they developed been acted on, not only 9/11, but also the October 2000, attack on the destroyer USS Cole in which 17 sailors died could have been prevented. Through computer scanning of some 2.5 terabytes of classified and unclassified data, the Able Danger team identified five "nodes" of al-Qaeda activity. One was in Brooklyn. Another was in the port of Aden in Yemen, where the USS Cole was attacked. Able Danger linked Mohamed Atta and three other 9/11 hijackers to the Brooklyn cell, said Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer, who was the liaison between the Defense Intelligence Agency and the Able Danger team. Colonel Shaffer testified he tried three times to have Able Danger data on the Brooklyn cell presented to the FBI, but that on each occasion Pentagon lawyers forbade the meeting. In a commentary in the Wall [Street] Journal last November, Louis Freeh, who was FBI director at the time, said that if he had been told about what Able Danger had learned, 9/11 likely would have been prevented. In March, 2000, Mr. Kleinsmith was ordered to stop all work on Able Danger, and, later, to delete all the information collected. It is clear there is a cover-up. One would think a Washington press corps obsessing about a hunting accident in Texas would be more curious about it.
Note: Though Able Danger received wide media coverage when first reported six months ago, the amazing revelations of the recent hearings have received very little attention, which is why we include this article from the leading newspaper of Toledo, Ohio. For lots more reliable, verifiable information on Able Danger, see https://www.WantToKnow.info/abledanger911
UK radiation jump blamed on Iraq shells
February 19, 2006, London Times
Radiation detectors in Britain recorded a fourfold increase in uranium levels in the atmosphere after the "shock and awe" bombing campaign against Iraq. Environmental scientists who uncovered the figures through freedom of information laws say it is evidence that depleted uranium from the shells was carried by wind currents to Britain. Government officials, however, say the sharp rise in uranium detected by radiation monitors in Berkshire was a coincidence and probably came from local sources. Each detector recorded a significant rise in uranium levels during the Gulf war bombing campaign in March 2003. The reading from a park in Reading was high enough for the Environment Agency to be alerted. "This research shows that rather than remaining near the target as claimed by the military, depleted uranium weapons contaminate both locals and whole populations hundreds to thousands of miles away," [Liverpool University's Chris Busby] said. Busby's report shows that within nine days of the start of the Iraq war on March 19, 2003, higher levels of uranium were picked up on five sites in Berkshire. On two occasions, levels exceeded the threshold at which the Environment Agency must be informed, though within safety limits. The report says weather conditions over the war period showed a consistent flow of air from Iraq northwards.
Note: For more on the depleted uranium cover-up: https://www.WantToKnow.info/050405depleteduranium
The deadly terror lurking around the corner
may not be such a big, ominous threat after all
February 19, 2006, San Francisco Chronicle
Americans receive a steady stream of warnings and alarms about new and horrific perils that await them. Pandemics, dirty bombs, cyber attacks, bioterror and other exotic threats are always on the verge of being unleashed onto a shamefully unprepared republic. Yet, judging from statistics on life expectancy, violent deaths and war, we live in much less perilous times than any generation before us. Avian flu, for example. We are cautioned that a pandemic...is only months away. One World Health Organization estimate says 2 million to 7 million people will die in the next pandemic. But it is not 1918. The WHO reports that since 2003, there have been 152 cases of avian flu, resulting in 83 deaths. A flu pandemic has been regularly predicted since 1997 and (knock on wood) it has never arrived. Dirty bombs -- conventional explosives mixed with radioactive material -- present another example of overreaction. In 2004, experts warned in the normally staid Wall Street Journal that a terrorist attack with a dirty bomb was an imminent certainty. They announced: "Shame on our leaders and on us if the lamentations of the next blue-ribbon panel will be intoned over the graves of hundreds of thousands of Americans, the collapse of our economy, and perhaps a fatal blow to our way of life." But the Nuclear Regulatory Commission says a dirty bomb would contaminate "up to several city blocks." The commission's advice, if one goes off, is to walk away and take a shower.
Note: This informative article, by a program director of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, demonstrates clearly how the hype and fear around terror is much more damaging than terrorism itself. For more on this from both BBC and my own experience: https://www.WantToKnow.info/powerofnightmares
Risk to U.S. of withering terrorist hit is overblown
February 19, 2006, San Francisco Chronicle
Conventional wisdom says that none of us is safe from terrorism. The truth is that almost all of us are. In most years allergic reactions to peanuts, deer in the road and lightning have all killed about the same number of Americans as terrorism. In 2001, their banner year, terrorists killed...one fifteenth the number killed by car accidents. And if something far worse than Sept. 11 does occur, the country will recover. A disaster of biblical proportions visited New Orleans. The Republic has not crumbled. The terrorist risk to the United States is serious, but far from existential. Human psychology leads us to overestimate the likelihood of dangers that are novel and uncontrollable. The news media and social interaction reinforce these common errors. People overestimate terrorism's risk and demand excessive protection from it. From government bureaucrats seeking larger budgets, to contractors hawking technology, to congressmen campaigning, danger sells. It delivers money and votes. It also sells newspapers. Careerist think tank and academic analysts learn that grants, invitations to Capitol Hill and jobs are more likely to go to those who trumpet threats and defenses against them than those who tell Americans to worry less. America tends to exaggerate national security dangers. Victory is persuading...regular Americans not to be afraid. Conventional pundits of homeland security worry that the public will become complacent. We should worry that it won't.
The Lowdown on Sweet?
February 12, 2006, New York Times
When Dr. Morando Soffritti...saw the results of his team's seven-year study on aspartame, he knew he was about to be injected into a bitter controversy over this sweetener. Aspartame is sold under the brand names Nutra-Sweet and Equal and is found in such popular products as Diet Coke, Diet Pepsi, Diet Snapple and Sugar Free Kool-Aid. Hundreds of millions of people consume it worldwide. Dr. Soffritti...oversees 180 scientists and researchers in 30 countries. Dr. Soffritti's study concluded...that the sweetener was associated with unusually high rates of lymphomas, leukemias and other cancers. The study...involved 1,900 laboratory rats and cost $1 million. Soffritti said he was inspired to look at aspartame because of what he calls "inadequacies" in the cancer studies done by Searle in the 1970's. Others have also challenged Searle's studies. Years before the F.D.A. approved aspartame, the agency had serious concerns about the accuracy and credibility of Searle's aspartame studies. From 1977 to 1985 – during much of the approval process – Searle was headed by Donald H. Rumsfeld, who is now the secretary of defense. Searle was acquired by Monsanto in 1985. Dr. Soffritti said...more research and open debate were needed on whether aspartame was a carcinogen. "It is very important to have scientists who are independent and not funded by industry looking at this."
Note: If you want to understand the influence of big money on your health, this article is well worth reading. Our Health Information Center at https://www.WantToKnow.info/healthinformation has lots more.
Bush v. Science
February 6, 2006, Washington Post
Bush's relationship to science can be illustrated by the fact that he is speaking rapturously of producing ethanol from (of all things) switch grass -- but not saying a word about what many scientists say may be the greatest disaster facing humankind: global climate change. [In] a Time magazine cover story...Mark Thompson and Karen Tumulty write that "growing numbers of researchers, both in and out of government, say their findings -- on pollution, climate change, reproductive health, stem-cell research and other areas in which science often finds itself at odds with religious, ideological or corporate interests -- are being discounted, distorted or quashed by Bush Administration appointees. In the past two years, the Union of Concerned Scientists has collected the signatures of more than 8,000 scientists -- including 49 Nobel laureates... -- who accuse the Administration of an unprecedented level of political intrusion into their world. Says Francesca Grifo, director of the group's Scientific Integrity Program,"'What's new is its pervasive and systemic nature. We get calls every week from federal scientists reporting stuff to us. Rarely, however, are they willing to put their jobs and their research grants at risk by going public with their complaints." 29-year NASA veteran James Hansen, who is director of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies, charged on the front page of the New York Times that he has been muzzled by the agency. Melissa Block interviewed Bransby on NPR and found out that politics played a role in Bush's mention of switch grass.
Finding Balance: WantToKnow.info Inspiration Center
WantToKnow.info believes it is important to balance disturbing cover-up information with inspirational writings which call us to be all that we can be and to work together for positive change. For an abundance of uplifting material, please visit our Inspiration Center.
See our exceptional archive of revealing news articles.
Please support this important work: Donate here
www.momentoflove.org - Every person in the world has a heart
www.personalgrowthcourses.net - Dynamic online courses powerfully expand your horizons
www.WantToKnow.info - Reliable, verifiable information on major cover-ups
www.weboflove.org - Strengthening the Web of Love that interconnects us all
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Change email address: The WantToKnow.info email list (two messages a week)
Intelligence Officers Revolt, Documents Reclassified, Torturers Go Free, Aspartame Concerns