Thursday, December 6, 2007

Albert Pike and Three World Wars

Continued from Part 1.

Albert Pike received a vision, which he described in a letter that he wrote to Mazzini, dated August 15, 1871. This letter graphically outlined plans for three world wars that were seen as necessary to bring about the One World Order, and we can marvel at how accurately it has predicted events that have already taken place.

Pike's Letter to Mazzini

It is a commonly believed fallacy that for a short time, the Pike letter to Mazzini was on display in the British Museum Library in London, and it was copied by William Guy Carr, former Intelligence Officer in the Royal Canadian Navy. The British Library has confirmed in writing to me that such a document has never been in their possession. Furthermore, in Carr's book, Satan, Prince of this World, Carr includes the following footnote:

"The Keeper of Manuscripts recently informed the author that this letter is NOT catalogued in the British Museum Library. It seems strange that a man of Cardinal Rodriguez's knowledge should have said that it WAS in 1925".

It appears that Carr learned about this letter from Cardinal Caro y Rodriguez of Santiago, Chile, who wrote The Mystery of Freemasonry Unveiled.

To date, no conclusive proof exists to show that this letter was ever written. Nevertheless, the letter is widely quoted and the topic of much discussion.

Following are apparently extracts of the letter, showing how Three World Wars have been planned for many generations.

"The First World War must be brought about in order to permit the Illuminati to overthrow the power of the Czars in Russia and of making that country a fortress of atheistic Communism. The divergences caused by the "agentur" (agents) of the Illuminati between the British and Germanic Empires will be used to foment this war. At the end of the war, Communism will be built and used in order to destroy the other governments and in order to weaken the religions." 2

Students of history will recognize that the political alliances of England on one side and Germany on the other, forged between 1871 and 1898 by Otto von Bismarck, co-conspirator of Albert Pike, were instrumental in bringing about the First World War.

"The Second World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences between the Fascists and the political Zionists. This war must be brought about so that Nazism is destroyed and that the political Zionism be strong enough to institute a sovereign state of Israel in Palestine. During the Second World War, International Communism must become strong enough in order to balance Christendom, which would be then restrained and held in check until the time when we would need it for the final social cataclysm." 3

After this Second World War, Communism was made strong enough to begin taking over weaker governments. In 1945, at the Potsdam Conference between Truman, Churchill, and Stalin, a large portion of Europe was simply handed over to Russia, and on the other side of the world, the aftermath of the war with Japan helped to sweep the tide of Communism into China.

(Readers who argue that the terms Nazism and Zionism were not known in 1871 should remember that the Illuminati invented both these movements. In addition, Communism as an ideology, and as a coined phrase, originates in France during the Revolution. In 1785, Restif coined the phrase four years before revolution broke out. Restif and Babeuf, in turn, were influenced by Rousseau - as was the most famous conspirator of them all, Adam Weishaupt.)

"The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the "agentur" of the "Illuminati" between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other. Meanwhile the other nations, once more divided on this issue will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustion…We shall unleash the Nihilists and the atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil. Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will from that moment be without compass or direction, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view. This manifestation will result from the general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and atheism, both conquered and exterminated at the same time." 4

Since the terrorist attacks of Sept 11, 2001, world events, and in particular in the Middle East, show a growing unrest and instability between Modern Zionism and the Arabic World. This is completely in line with the call for a Third World War to be fought between the two, and their allies on both sides. This Third World War is still to come, and recent events show us that it is not far off.

Tuesday, November 20, 2007

Kanye West's mother's plastic surgeon speaks

Kanye West's mother's plastic surgeon speaks

11/20/2007 2:00 PM, Yahoo! Music
courtesy of

Dr. Jan Adams--the man who performed plastic surgery on Kanye West's mother, shortly before she died--has spoken about the suspicions surrounding him.

Adams has suggested that Donda West may have died of a vicodin overdose, as he prescribed the drug to her.

The Los Angeles Coroners' Office had initially judged a verdict of death because of surgery or anaesthesia, but an investigation into the cause of death has been launched.

Adams told the Los Angeles Times: "When she left this office, there was no problem whatsoever."

He added: "[She] probably [had] a rough night," referring to the evening after the surgery he performed.

Asked whether he thought West may have taken too many painkillers, Adams replied: "That's one speculation on my part, yes. I believe I know exactly what happened to her, but I will not comment on it until I see the final report."

Meanwhile it has emerged that when he performed Donda's surgery, the Medical Board Of California were seeking to remove Adams's license to practice because of multiple alcohol-related arrests. However, he played this down.

Adams also acknowledged there had been were two malpractice judgments against him, but defended his record, explaining: "There have been some malpractice suits, but 99 percent of them are what we in this business call nuisance suits...there's nothing going on here that represents malpractice."

The investigation continues.

High court to rule on D.C. handgun ban

Tue Nov 20, 2007 2:25pm EST

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Supreme Court said on Tuesday it would decide whether handguns can be banned in the nation's capital, a case that could produce its first ruling in nearly 70 years on the right of Americans to bear arms.

The nation's highest court agreed to hear an appeal by officials from the District of Columbia government arguing that the city's 31-year-old law banning private possession of handguns should be upheld as constitutional.

The justices said they would review a precedent-setting ruling by a U.S. appeals court that broadly interpreted an individual's constitutional right under the Second Amendment to bear arms and struck down the city's law for violating those rights.

The Supreme Court will hear arguments in the case most likely in late February or in March, with a ruling expected by the end of June. The decision could be a factor in the political debate in the 2008 elections.

Supporters and opponents of the law, one of the strictest in the nation, agreed the case could have important legal and political significance.

The Second Amendment says, "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

City lawyers argued the amendment guaranteed the right to bear arms only in connection with service in a state-regulated militia, like today's National Guard, and not for individuals.

But the appeals court adopted the position that the Bush administration has advocated previously -- that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to keep and bear arms.

The justices, in their decision to take the case, rephrased the issue as whether provisions of the Washington handgun ban violate the Second Amendment rights of individuals "who wish to keep handguns and other firearms for private use in their homes."

The Supreme Court has not ruled on the scope of the Second Amendment since a 1939 decision when it upheld a federal gun control law but did not definitively resolve the constitutional issue.

(Reporting by Randall Mikkelsen, Editing by David Alexander)

CBS News writers authorize union to call a strike

Mon Nov 19, 2007 6:07pm EST

NEW YORK (Reuters) - CBS News writers, producers and editors voted to authorize their labor union to call a strike after working without a contract for two years.

About 81 percent of the nearly 300 CBS members of the Writers Guild of America voted to authorize the strike, the union said in a statement. The union represents 500 CBS employees in New York, Los Angeles, Chicago and Washington D.C.

The Writers Guild is also involved in the most serious Hollywood labor confrontation in 20 years. TV and movie industry writers went on strike on November 5 after a deadlock with major studios over union demands for a bigger share of revenue from the Internet.

The union rejected CBS's last contract offer, which established a two-tier wage package, with one tier for TV and network radio workers and a second for local radio members.

The contract for television and radio CBS News employees expired in April 2, 2005. The union said its employees have not had a pay raise since April 2004.

CBS News is a division of broadcaster CBS Corp.

(Reporting by Kenneth Li; Editing by Gary Hill)

Children herded like cattle into Maryland courthouse for forced vaccinations as armed police and attack dogs stand guard

Monday, November 19, 2007 by: Mike Adams

(NewsTarget) Following the State of Maryland's threats against parents who refuse to have their children vaccinated, children were herded into a Price George County courthouse being guarded by armed personnel with attack dogs. Inside, the children were forcibly vaccinated, many against their will, under orders from the State Attorney General, various State Judges and the local School Board Director, all of whom illegally conspired to threaten parents with imprisonment if they did not submit their children to vaccinations.

The State of Maryland has now turned to Gestapo tactics to force its medical will upon the People, stripping parents of any right to decide how they wish to protect their own children from infectious disease. Health authorities there have already announced their intent to essentially kidnap parents and throw them in jail, removing them from their children for up to thirty days if they continue to refuse to have their children vaccinated. This will all be conducted at gunpoint, with armed personnel and attack dogs at the ready, making sure nobody steps out of line, and suppressing any attempt at public dissent against the Orwellian vaccination policies.

The entire campaign against these parents is blatantly illegal. There is no law in Maryland requiring the vaccination of children, thus parents who refuse to do so may not be legally charged with violating any law. Instead, Maryland health and school authorities are using Gestapo-like tactics, threatening to charge the parents with child truancy violations, criminalizing them for daring to protect their children from the dangerous chemicals found in vaccines (including thimerosal, a chemical additive containing a neurotoxic form of mercury).

The desperation of organized medicine is becoming increasingly apparent

As more and more parents are becoming informed about the dangers of vaccinations and their link to autism, state health authorities are increasingly turning to "Gunpoint Medicine" to force the People to submit to the poisons of conventional medicine. Parents who attempt to save their children from deadly chemotherapy chemicals are being arrested and having their children kidnapped by Child Protective Services (see ), and oncologists who used to be armed only with radiation machines and chemotherapy injectors and now arming themselves with U.S. Marshals and other local law enforcement authorities who are using loaded firearms to enforce "the will of the State" against parents who resist.

Even the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) announced its strong opposition to the Maryland "Gunpoint Medicine" vaccination campaign. In a press release published Nov. 16, the AAPS states:

The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons today condemned the “vaccine roundup” executed in Prince George’s county Maryland this week, and promised to do everything it can to support parents who refuse to immunize their children.

“This power play obliterates informed consent and parental rights,” said Kathryn Serkes, director of policy for the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), one of the few national physician groups that refuse corporate funding from pharmaceutical companies.

In a scenario reminiscent of cattle round-ups, the state’s attorney has issued summons to more than 1600 parents of children who have not provided certificates of immunization for their children. But instead of toting a cattle prod, this state’s attorney chooses to wield a syringe to keep the “herd” in line.

Read the rest of the press release at:

Gunpoint Medicine: Why drug pushers must now rely on Gestapo tactics

Conventional (pharmaceutical) medicine is the only system of medicine in the world that is so unpopular with informed consumers that it must be administered at the barrel of a gun. There is no other system of medicine anywhere in the world that resorts to such tactics to recruit patients.

At the Nov. 17th event in Maryland, activists Jim Moody and Kelly Ann Davis from SafeMinds ( were able to get in front of TV news cameras and voice their opposition to the coerced vaccination policy. Yet, amazingly, most parents just lined up like cattle ready to be branded, not bothering to question the sanity or legality of the very system in which they were now agreeing to participate.

A health freedom blog called Center for the Common Interest ( also covered the event, and it reports that a local activist named Donovan Hubbard videotaped the event and plans to make the video available online. (NewsTarget would like to contact Donovan and / or publicize his video. If you know of a way we can contact him, please call us at (520) 232-9300 to let us know...)

What's next for Gunpoint Medicine?

As the truth continues to emerge about the extreme dangers of vaccinations and pharmaceuticals, Big Pharma is becoming increasingly desperate to coerce the public into relying on its products. It is now working closely with state authorities (including Governors of several states) to mandate the use of vaccinations on young children. This results in the criminalization of parents who refuse to subject their children to these dangerous chemicals.

In effect, Big Pharma is hoping to turn natural health followers into criminals.

The FDA has already criminalized nutritional supplement companies who dare to tell the truth about the health benefits of their supplements. (Read the true history of armed FDA raids on vitamin companies here: )

Next, parents who refuse to subject their children to the chemical pharmaceuticals proposed by Big Pharma will be criminalized, rounded up and incarcerated for "refusing to comply with public health policy." This is all being done by the State in the name of "protecting the children" from their own natural health parents. (Insane, isn't it, to think that protecting your child from toxic chemicals is now a criminal act in the United States?)

The end game of all this is to apply Gunpoint Medicine tactics to everyone: Adults and senior citizens included. Anyone suffering from high cholesterol, for example, who does not submit to Big Pharma's statin drugs could be arrested, strapped to a table and medicated against their will. People with cancer could be arrested for choosing to treat that cancer with safe and effective botanical medicines instead of patented, high-profit Big Pharma drugs. If you think the prisons are full enough right now from all the arrests for marijuana possession and other victimless crimes, just wait until the State starts arresting all the natural health moms and dads across the country who refuse to participate in the utterly insane and extremely harmful system of medicine that now dominates U.S. health care today.

The State is very clear about medicine: If you want to remain a free citizen, you must submit to the synthetic drugs made by the very same corporations that now control government health regulators. Any person who resists such "treatments" will be branded a threat to public health -- a designation just beneath "terrorist" in the eyes of many government bureaucrats. As such, they believe there is no limit to the level of force they may use to coerce such people into submitting to Big Pharma's chemicals. Today, it's armed guards with attack dogs. Tomorrow, it might be water boarding or other torture methods. Think that's impossible? Think again: Just five years ago, nobody in their right mind would have thought that parents who did not want to get their children vaccinated would end up in prison, their children kidnapped by state authorities and forced to subject themselves to dangerous chemical injections at gunpoint. Yet that is precisely what is happening right now in the state of Maryland. It happened on Saturday, in fact.

Where is the outrage?

What's most interesting about this issue of using the threat of imprisonment to force vaccinations upon children is not necessarily who is speaking out against it, but who has chosen to remain silent.

The American Medical Association, for example, has said nothing in opposition to the policy. Neither has the Food and Drug Administration. Where is the outrage from the Maryland Hospital Association? None of these organizations seem to have a problem with Gunpoint Medicine. The idea of rounding up parents and coercing their children into receiving injections of toxic chemicals does not seem to bother these organizations. And why should it? All of these organizations are closely tied to Big Pharma. They're all in favor of vaccinations for all, it seems, and I have no doubt that some individuals in these organizations (especially the AMA) are strongly in favor of the Gunpoint Medicine coerced vaccination policy being played out in Maryland right now.

Organized medicine believes the People are too stupid to be allowed to make their own health decisions. Bureaucrats and physicians should be the ones making these decisions, we're told, and any person who disagrees with such decisions should be labeled a criminal, arrested and prosecuted. This is no exaggeration. It is, in fact, a shockingly accurate description of Maryland's current vaccination policy.

It wasn't too long ago that Americans would have stood up and rallied against this kind of medical tyranny. The major news networks would have denounced Maryland's vaccination policy with strong language and harsh accusations. People would have been marching in the streets, demanding their health freedom. But today, it's a different America. The People are drugged up on pharmaceuticals and dosed on fluoride. They're too intoxicated to think straight, and they're frightened into submission by a fear-based government that invokes domestic tyranny at every opportunity to control and manipulate the People into doing whatever it wants.

The "free" America we all once knew is long gone, and it has been replaced with The United States of Corporate America, where police tactics are now used to enforce hazardous public health policies, and the people who run the State no longer think there's anything wrong with rounding up the population at gunpoint and performing large-scale medical experiments on their children. That's what modern vaccines are, after all: A grand medical experiment whose effects will only become known after a generation of mass poisoning has come and gone.

See more articles on: parents | gunpoint medicine | vaccination

Articles related to this article:

State-sponsored medical terrorism: Texas authorities arrest parents, kidnap their teenage daughter, and force her through chemotherapy against her will

Medical Tyranny in Maryland: Parents Threatened With Jail Time for Not Vaccinating Children

Top 20 things that are more dangerous to children than lead paint in Mattel toys

Physical education is key to improving a child's confidence, brainpower and long-term health

Virginia law guaranteeing parents' medical rights routed by mandatory HPV vaccination

'Greens' movement may have darker agenda

'Greens' movement may have darker agenda
2007 11 12

By Frank Malloy |

Many of us recall that worried warning from the nervous rabbit, or the later Chicken Little version, in the stories from our youth. That same message is being sounded again by the likes of Al Gore with his movie "An Inconvenient Truth."

The movie purportedly shows the ecological and environmental damages being done to our planet by us humans. Gore has now won the Nobel Peace Prize.

Dare to differ
Some, however, would dare to differ with the former vice president on shrinking Himalayan glaciers, the snowcap on Mt. Kilimanjaro, the expanding African desert and the meltdown of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets.

Many of them are learned people, such as James Taylor, senior fellow for environment policy at the Heartland Institute, who claims Gore distorts science and ignores data that defies his theory of global warming. So, what's up? This is the same guy who supposedly invented the Internet a few years back.

Some environmentalists, such as Britain's Prince Phillip, formerly the president of the World Wildlife Fund, are showing us the hidden hand behind the eco-environmental movement.

When asked what he would be were he to be reincarnated, he said he would wish to return as "a killer virus to lower human population levels." Unfortunately, as a longtime proponent of population control, he was not kidding.

To find out about the "Greens," we have to pay attention to what those who purport to be its leaders are saying. Does this movement to save the planet have another, darker agenda such as population control?

Everyone wants clean air and water. Everyone is for not trashing our planet. Not everyone, however, is of the extreme opinion that in order to accomplish these things, we must drastically reduce human population levels.


Mikhail Gorbachev
Mikhail Gorbachev, former Russian president, founder of the Gorbachev Foundation and head of Green Cross International, claims the environment crisis is the cornerstone of the new world order. He is also co-author, along with Steven Rockefeller, of the United Nations Earth Charter.

Steven Rockefeller
The Earth Charter is a kind of environmental Ten Commandments intended to become a universally adopted creed that will prepare the world's children to accept the necessity of world government to save the planet.

At Gorbachev's State of the World Forum in 1995, philosopher and author Sam Keen told the gathering elites that the ecological crisis is the population crisis, while urging them to promote sexuality, contraception and abortion.

He further suggested, "Cut the population by 90 percent and there aren't enough people left to do a great deal of ecological damage. Scary, isn't it? And who decides on the 10 percent who get to stay?

Jacques Costeau
Consider oceanographer Jacques Costeau's article in a United Nations 1991 UNESCO Courier, whereby he called for the elimination of 350,000 people per day in order to "stabilize world population." These people are serious. What lengths will they go to in order to accomplish their goal?

Experts publishing dissenting views to global warming and the facts verifying their views get no media attention.

Paul Ehrlich
Paul Erhlich's hysterical "Population Bomb" was a success in sales but a failure with the crystal ball. His predictions of global famine and millions of starving people were all wrong. Yet, his way of solving all these ills was all too familiar -- "population control is the answer."

Joseph D'Alea, director of meteorology for the Weather Channel, claims that "we are responsible for just .001 percent of this atmosphere." If the atmosphere was a 100-story building, our anthropogenic (generated by man) CO2 contribution today would be equivalent to the linoleum on the first floor.

Straight talk

Fred Singer
We get some straight talk from S. Fred Singer, a climate physicist, who co-wrote the book "Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1500 Years." In it he writes "We've had greenhouse theory with no evidence to support it -- except for a moderate warming turned into a scare by computer models whose results have never been verified with real world events."

Samantha Smith, author of the 1993 book "Goddess Earth," writes that world socialism is the primary goal of the environmental movement and to achieve it, "independent Americans have to be scared, as well as shamed into conforming to an international agenda calling for Earth stewardship, simple lifestyle and the redistribution of the world's wealth."

Look closely behind the environmental scare and at things like war, famine, abortion and euthanasia. Are your children being schooled on the Earth Charter?

Is the sky really falling? Is global warming "an inconvenient truth" or a convenient lie and the newest version of Chicken Little readying us for a Godless "new world order?"

Perhaps a more suitable name for Gore's film might be "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon."

Article from:

Related: Earth Charter
Paul R. Ehrlich
Professor Singer Takes on Al Gore and Global Warming Alarmism
The truth about global warming - it's the Sun that's to blame
SUV's On Jupiter? - Solar System Warming
Sunspots more active than for 8000 years
Scientist: Sun's Burning Hotter Than Usual
Scientists Reconstructed the Sun's Activity Over the Last 11 Millennia
Solar Scientist Give Global Warming Fanatics a Black Eye
Sun's next 11-year cycle could be 50% stronger
Volcanic eruptions, ancient global warming linked
'Sun not responsible for climate change'
Solar flares will disrupt GPS in 2011
Red Ice Creations Radio - Jerry E. Smith - Global Warming (Subscription)
Red Ice Creations Radio - Susan Joy Rennison - Cosmic Origins of Global Warming
An experiment that hints we are wrong on climate change

The Illuminati and K of C Oaths Administered To All New Members

The Illuminati and K of C Oaths Administered To All New Members

What follows below is the actual oath that members of the Illuminati take when they join the order. Is this an oath YOU would take?!

by Kentroversy

In the spring of 1988, when I was recruited (and subsequently refused) to join the Freemasons, one of the problems I had was with the oaths I would be expected to take at every step of advancement along the path of the 'fellow traveler.' I have reprinted two oaths below -- the first is the oath that a new member of the Illuminati is expected to take -- which is fairly severe and very intense.

The second oath is given to new members of the Knights of Columbus are required to take -- which is very gruesome and quite creepy in its' implications -- and pay special attention to the consequences of NOT following the demands as set forth by the oath itself.

And, here is the actual OATH OF THE ILLUMINATI ...

Before the Oath is administered it is said -- a sword is pointed at the breast:

"Shouldst thou become a traitor or perjurer, let this sword remind thee of each and all the members in arms against thee. Do not hope to find safety; whithersoever thou mayest fly, shame and remorse as well as the vengeance of thine unknown brothers will torture and pursue thee."

Then in the Oath which follows he swears:

"... Eternal silence, and faithfulness and everlasting obedience to all superiors and regulations of the Order. I also renounce my own personal views and opinions as well as all control of my powers and capacities. I promise also to consider the well-being of the Order as my own, and I am ready, as long as I am a member, to serve it with my goods, my honour, and my life ... If I act against the rules and well-being of the Society, I will submit myself to the penalties to which my superiors may condemn me ..."

"In the name of the son crucified (i.e. the Pentagram, the illuminised man), swear to break the bonds which still bind you to your father, mother, brothers, sisters, wife, relatives, friends, mistresses, kings, chiefs, benefactors, and all persons to whomsoever you may have promised faith, obedience, and service. Name and curse the place where you were born, so that you may dwell in another sphere, to which you will attain only after having renounced this pestilential globe, vile refuse of the heavens! From this moment you are free from the so-called oath to country and laws: swear to reveal to the new chief, recognised by you, what you may have seen or done, intercepted, read or heard, learned or surmised, and also seek for and spy out what your eyes cannot discern. Honour and respect the Aqua Tofana (i.e. an imperceptably slow poison) as a sure, prompt, and necessary means of purging the globe by death of those who seek to vilify the truth and sieze it from our hands. Fly from Spain, Naples, and all accursed land; finally fly from the temptation to reveal what you may hear, for the thunder is no prompter that the knife, which awaits you in whatsoever place you may be. Live in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. (The Trinity of Illuminism -- Cabalistic and Gnostic. The Father -- the generating fire; the Holy Spirit -- the Great Mother Nature, reproducing all things; the Son -- the manifestation, the vital fluid, the astral light of Illuminism)."

And, here is the Oath of the KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS -- whose members privately refer to themselves as Knights of Christ:

What follows below is the actual oath that all new members of the Knights of Columbus take when they join the order. Is this an oath YOU would take?! It is pretty grissly, to be sure!

"I, ............, now in the presence of Almighty God, the blessed Virgin Mary, the blessed St. John the Baptist, the Holy Apostles, St. Peter and St. Paul, and all the saints, sacred host of heaven, and to you, my Ghostly Father, the superior general of the Society of Jesus rounded by St. Ignatius Loyola, in the pontification of Paul the III and continued to the present, do by the womb at the Virgin, the matrix of God, and the rod of Jesus Christ, declare and swear that His Holiness the Pope, is Christ's vice regent and is the true and only head of the Catholic or Universal Church throughout the earth; and that by virtue of the keys of binding and loosing given His Holiness by my Savior, Jesus Christ, he hath power to depose heretical kings, princes, States, Commonwealths, and Governments and they may be safely destroyed. Therefore to the utmost of ray power I will defend this doctrine and His Holiness's right and custom against all usurpers of the heretical or Protestant authority whatever, especially the Lutheran Church of Germany, Holland, Denmark, Sweden, and Norway and the now pretended authority and Churches of England and Scotland, and the branches of same now established in Ireland and on the Continent of America and elsewhere, and all adherents in regard that they may be usurped and heretical, opposing the sacred Mother Church of Rome."

"I do now denounce and disown any allegiance as due to any heretical king, prince, or State, named Protestant or Liberals, or obedience to any of their laws, magistrates, or officers."

"I do further declare that the doctrine of the Churches of England and Scotland, of the Calvinists, Huguenots, and others of the name of Protestants or Masons to be damnable, and they themselves to be damned who will not forsake the same."

"I do further declare that I will help assist, and advise all or any of His Holiness's agents, in any place where I should be, in Switzerland, Germany, Holland, Ireland, or America, or in any other kingdom or territory I shall come to and do my utmost to extirpate the heretical Protestant or Masonic doctrines and to destroy all their pretended powers, legal or otherwise."

"I do further promise and declare that, notwithstanding I am dispensed with to assume any religion heretical for the propagation of the Mother Church's interest to keep secret and private all her agents' counsels from time to time, as they intrust me and not divulge, directly or indirectly, by word, writing, or circumstances whatever but to execute all that should be proposed, given in charge or discovered unto me by you my Ghostly Father, or any of this sacred order."

"I do further promise and declare that I will have no opinion or will of my own or any mental reservation whatsoever, even as a corpse or cadaver (perinde ac cadaver), but will unhesitatingly obey each and every command that I may receive from my superiors in the militia of the Pope and of Jesus Christ."

"That I will go to any part of the world whithersoever I may be sent, to the frozen regions north, jungles of India, to the centers of civilization of Europe, or to the wild haunts of the barbarous savages of America without murmuring or repining, and will be submissive in all things whatsoever is communicated to me."

"I do further promise and declare that I will, when opportunity presents, make and wage relentless war, secretly and openly against all heretics, Protestants and Masons, as I am directed to do to extirpate them from the face of the whole earth; and that I will spare neither age, sex, or condition, and that will hang, bum, waste, boil, flay, strangle, and bury alive these infamous heretics; rip up the stomachs and wombs of their women, and crush their infants' heads against the wails in order to annihilate their execrable race. That when the same can not be done openly, I will secretly use the poisonous cup, the strangulation cord, the steel of the poniard, or the leaden bullet, regardless of the honor, rank, dignity, or authority of the persons, whatever may be their condition in life, either public or private, as I at any time may be directed so to do by any agents of the Pope or superior of the Brotherhood of the Holy Father of the Society of Jesus."

"In confirmation of which I hereby dedicate my life, soul, and all corporal powers, and with the dagger which I now receive I will subscribe my name written in my blood in testimony thereof; and should I prove false or weaken in my determination, may my brethren and fellow soldiers of the militia of the Pope cut off my hands and feet and my throat from ear to ear, my belly opened and sulphur burned therein with all the punishment that can be inflicted upon me on earth and my soul shall be tortured by demons in eternal hell forever."

"That I will in voting always vote for K. of C, in preference to a Protestant, especially a Mason, and that I will leave my party so to do; that if two Catholics are on the ticket I will satisfy myself which is the better supporter of Mother Church and vote accordingly."

"That I will not deal with or employ a Protestant if in my power to deal with or employ a Catholic. That I will place Catholic girls in Protestant families that a weekly report may be made of the inner movements of the heretics."

"That I will provide myself with arms and ammunition that I may be in readiness when the word is passed, or I am commanded to defend the church either as an individual or with the militia of the Pope."

"All of which I, ............, do swear by the blessed Trinity and blessed sacrament which I am now to receive to perform and on part to keep this, my oath."

"In testimony hereof, I take this most holy and blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist and witness the same further with my name written with the point of this dagger dipped in my own blood and seal in the face of this holy sacrament."

How about THIS Oath? Would YOU take it?!

Personally, I wouldn't take EITHER of these -- which is the reason WHY I said "No!!" to Freemasonry nearly twenty years ago.

© 2007 Kentroversy Papers
All rights reserved. Used with permission.


The following sources were used in the creation of this Kentroversy Paper . . .

Oaths of K of C and Illuminati - Congressional Record; U.S. House of Representatives (February 15, 1913); pgs. 3216-3217.

Illuminati and Knights of Columbus Oaths

Sunday, November 11, 2007

"We, the Jews, control America"
ARAB NEWS - Sunday, 24, December, 2006 (04, Dhul Hijjah, 1427)

"We, the Jews, control America"

Return of the 'American' Jedi

Dr. Khaled Batarfi,

The Israeli lobby in America is under pressure these days. It seems they crossed so many red lines that some hot-blooded Americans felt obliged to protest.

The 2002 Nobel Peace Prize winner, former US President Jimmy Carter, is not alone with his recent book "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid" and LA Times and Guardian article, "How I See Palestine." A recent Harvard study entitled "The Israel Lobby" by Professors John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt details the ways of the lobby and its victims. Tellingly, they later joined the victim list. There are similar studies and books exposing the lobby, like "They Dare to Speak Out: People and Institutions Confront Israel’s Lobby" by 22-year veteran Congressman Paul Findley whose stand cost him dearly, and "Jewish Power: Inside the American Jewish Establishment" by American-Jewish insider, J. J. Goldberg.

Some still think this is a lobby like any. An American friend argued that the tobacco and gun lobbies are among the strongest in the US. They use similar aggressive methods to advance their agenda and influence decision makers in Congress and the Administration — what is the difference? I explained that these groups are working on an all-American platform, claiming to represent and defend the interests of the American public and businesses.

In the Israeli lobby case, it is Americans for Israel. They fight and pressure not for the good of the American nation, but for that of a foreign country. They even dare to say it loud and clear, like former House Majority Leader Dick Armey who pronounced in September 2002: "My No. 1 priority in foreign policy is to protect Israel." (Not America!)

This Christian Zionist congressman and chief author of the Republican Contract with America, who called in May 2004 for ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, is not alone. According to the Harvard study, the lobby also includes prominent Christian evangelicals like Gary Bauer, Jerry Falwell, Ralph Reed and Pat Robertson, as well as Tom DeLay, former majority leader in the House of Representatives and Trent Lott, Senate minority leader. All of whom believe Israel’s rebirth is the fulfillment of biblical prophecy and support its expansionist agenda; to do otherwise, they believe, would be contrary to God’s will. Neo-conservative gentiles such as John Bolton; Robert Bartley, the former Wall Street Journal editor; William Bennett, the former secretary of education; Jeane Kirkpatrick, the former UN ambassador; and the influential columnist George Will are also steadfast supporters. Other Jewish senators and congressmen work to ensure that US foreign policy supports Israel’s interests.

You can’t argue with success. For decades, the centerpiece of US Middle Eastern policy has been its relationship with Israel. The combination of unwavering support for Israel has inflamed Arab and Islamic opinion and jeopardized not only US security but that of much of the rest of the world. This situation has no equal in American political history.

According to the Harvard study, Washington has provided Israel with a level of support dwarfing that given to any other state. It has been the largest annual recipient of direct economic and military assistance since 1976, and is the largest recipient in total since World War II, to the tune of well over $140 billion (in 2004 dollars). Israel receives about $3 billion in direct assistance each year, roughly one-fifth of the US foreign aid budget, and worth about $500 a year for every Israeli. This largesse is especially striking since Israel is now a wealthy industrial state with a budget surplus and a per capita income roughly equal to that of South Korea or Spain.

Since 1982, the US has vetoed 32 Security Council resolutions critical of Israel. It blocks the efforts of Arab states to put Israel’s nuclear arsenal on the International Atomic Energy Agency’s agenda.

The US consistently supported the Israeli position in every peace negotiation. An American participant at Camp David in 2000 later said: "Far too often, we Israel’s lawyer." Finally, the Bush Administration’s ambition to transform the Middle East is at least partly aimed at improving Israel’s strategic situation.

Israel knows it could rely on the lobby and its friends in the American power structure. They never fail it even if it means sacrificing their own country’s best interests. Whatever Israel wants Israel gets.

That is why Israeli former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in Oct. 3, 2001 said to Shimon Peres, as reported on Kol Yisrael radio, "Every time we do something you tell me America will do this and will do that...I want to tell you something very clear: Don’t worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it."

I wonder what type of Americans know this and accept it. I am pretty sure it is not the American public.

Wesley Snipes Seeks Change of Venue in Tax Fraud Trial from Ocala, FL to NYC to Avoid "Hotbed of Klan Activity"

From the Smoking Gun:

In a bid to get his criminal tax evasion trial transferred from Florida to New York, Wesley Snipes claims that prosecutors "deliberately chose the most racially discriminatory venue available," an area that the actor claims is a "hotbed of Klan activity" and where "substantial pockets of prejudice exist."

In a venue change motion filed yesterday in U.S. District Court in Ocala, Snipes claims that government lawyers are angling to get an "all-white Southern jury" to hear its case against the 45-year-old performer. According to the November 5 Snipes motion, the Ocala area features statues honoring the KKK founder, and the hate group "adopted highways to commemorate the Klan." Additionally, he adds, "the Confederate Flag flies over government property."

To support the claim that he faces a possible judicial lynching, Snipes commissioned a public opinion poll comparing racial attitudes in the Ocala area and his preferred judicial jurisdiction, the Southern District of New York (which includes Manhattan, The Bronx, and a few outlying counties). The survey report, a copy of which you'll find here, includes New York-Florida comparisons on topics like interracial marriage, race-based hiring preferences, and whether the Confederate flag is a symbol of pride, not prejudice. Oh, and when asked whether burning a cross on someone's lawn should be a federal crime, the Snipes poll found that 23.8% of Ocala residents replied "No." That's compared to 13.2% of New Yorkers polled. Though a previous Snipes venue change bid was rejected, a federal judge recently allowed the refiling of motions after the actor fired his entire legal team for what he claimed was incompetence.

Other press and blogosphere coverage:

November 9, 2007 in Celebrity Tax Lore | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Wesley Snipes Seeks Change of Venue in Tax Fraud Trial from Ocala, FL to NYC to Avoid "Hotbed of Klan Activity":

» THE TWO-TRACK SNIPES DEFENSE from Roth & Company, P.C.
The Tax Update questioned whether it was wise for Wesley Snipes to abandon the race card in fighting his tax... [Read More]

FOX Anchor Calls for Terrorist Car Bombings In Iran

NOTE: Don't get it twisted, I don't think he was cut off due to poor weather conditions in NY....his azz was cut off because he was about to respond by saying "ABSOLUTELY!". They ain't slick. See for yourself.

In the clip below, Fox and Friends' Brian Kilmeade openly calls for US support for acts of terrorism—such as car bombings—in Tehran.

His criminal remarks are a direct offense to victims of terrorism all around the world and render Kilmeade morally equivalent to terrorist groups like al Qaeda which he ostensibly denounces.

Government seeks to redefine privacy

NOTE: Even though we KNOW they're listening in on our conversations, pay close attention to this article, you just 'might' learn something. Then ask yourself....WHO are they REALLY protecting? Please don't fall for the ol', this is done on behalf of America's safety and all that 'National Security' bull krap. Who's the real enemy here? Seems like it's you & me. They're even more concerned about the phone companies then they are the American Citizens! Heard any clicking on your phones lately?

By PAMELA HESS, Associated Press Writer Sun Nov 11, 6:18 AM ET

WASHINGTON - A top intelligence official says it is time people in the United States changed their definition of privacy.

Privacy no longer can mean anonymity, says Donald Kerr, a deputy director of national intelligence. Instead, it should mean that government and businesses properly safeguards people's private communications and financial information.

Kerr's comments come as Congress is taking a second look at the Foreign Surveillance Intelligence Act.

Lawmakers hastily changed the 1978 law last summer to allow the government to eavesdrop inside the United States without court permission, so long as one end of the conversation was reasonably believed to be located outside the U.S.

The original law required a court order for any surveillance conducted on U.S. soil, to protect Americans' privacy. The White House argued that the law was obstructing intelligence gathering.

The most contentious issue in the new legislation is whether to shield telecommunications companies from civil lawsuits for allegedly giving the government access to people's private e-mails and phone calls without a court order between 2001 and 2007.

Some lawmakers, including members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, appear reluctant to grant immunity. Suits might be the only way to determine how far the government has burrowed into people's privacy without court permission.

The committee is expected to decide this week whether its version of the bill will protect telecommunications companies.

The central witness in a California lawsuit against AT&T says the government is vacuuming up billions of e-mails and phone calls as they pass through an AT&T switching station in San Francisco.

Mark Klein, a retired AT&T technician, helped connect a device in 2003 that he says diverted and copied onto a government supercomputer every call, e-mail, and Internet site access on AT&T lines


Image 'Copyleft' by Carlos Latuff
A DesertPeace Editorial

Interesting how racial profiling takes on different venues in different countries. My own observations in Israel are as follows.... There has ALWAYS been a separation of sorts between the Jewish and Palestinian population here. In the 80's all Arab taxi drivers had license plates that began with the numbers 666.... this was interesting as the concept is taken from the New Testament, not the Old. Coincidence? I think not... It was a way to 'alert' prospective Jewish passengers that the driver was 'one of them'....'not one of us' very subtle, but very damaging to the person trying to earn a living.

There was also a colour scheme used on Identity Cards; Jewish Israelis had theirs in a plastic folio that was blue, Palestinians from the territories had theirs in an orange folio. This was a 'quick' way to distinguish the Jew from the Palestinian. On the card itself, it identified the bearer as Jew or Arab. (brings to mind one of the complaints Jews in the Former Soviet Union had, they resented the fact that they were 'forced' to carry ID cards identifying them as Jews, I don't hear them complaining here...)
The words Jew or Arab were recently replaced by a series of asterisks, the number of which identifies the bearer in the same way.

The above methods of separation or profiling eventually led to the building of a wall to completely separate the two peoples. This was done under the guise of security.... it was actually done to be able to have complete control over those occupied including the facilitation of their slaughter. In other words, genocide was the eventual plan.

Another example of profiling comes from wartime Denmark. The occupying nazis order all of the Jews living there to wear a yellow star on their arm. It is believed that the first Danish citizen to put on that star was the King of Denmark himself, followed by thousands of his subjects, making it impossible for the nazis to determine who was a Jew and who wasn't. This is one of the most brilliant acts of resistance to profiling. Unlike other countries in Eastern Europe, the Jews of Denmark were not rounded up and slaughtered.

Profiling continues today. The most recent example occurred in Los Angeles just the other day when the local police force starting 'mapping out' Muslim communities. On Thursday, Deputy Chief Michael P. Downing stated that "We want to know where the Pakistanis, Iranians and Chechens are so we can reach out to those communities."
He also said he wanted to "take a deeper look at the history, demographics, language, culture, ethnic breakdown, socioeconomic status and social interactions of the city's Muslim communities."

Also on Thursday, several Muslim groups and the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California sent Downing a letter expressing "grave concerns" about the program.
"Singling out individuals for investigation, surveillance, and data-gathering based on their religion constitutes religious profiling that is just as unlawful, ill-advised and deeply offensive as racial profiling," said the letter.

Once the areas are 'mapped out' will a wall be built to separate them from the rest of society? Will the residents within the wall be asked to wear a yellow crescent on their arm? Where will it stop??

My question is will the American people allow this to happen to a section of their population? 'Security' at the expense of another's rights is not security. No one is free unless we all are, that is security.

The examples I gave at the start of this post might seem exaggerated to some of my readers, I can assure you that they are all based on fact. There is no doubt in my mind that profiling is a prelude to genocide... DON'T ALLOW IT TO HAPPEN!

A New Low in U. S. Behavior

NOTE: In case you wonder exactly what "Waterboarding" is here's an explanation:
"It involves strapping an individual down face up so he or she is completely immobile, on an inclined board with the person's feet raised above the head. The victim's face is covered, sometimes wrapped with cellophane. Sometimes the victim is gagged. The torturer then pours water repeatedly onto the person's face. This gives the impression of being submerged under waves and the victim believes he or she is drowning. The gag reflex activates as the person involuntarily tries to save him or herself from drowning. The experience, as related by those who have so been tortured, is terrifying"

A New Low in U. S. Behavior
Legitimizing Torture

November 10, 2007

The U.S. now has an Attorney General, Mr. Michael Mukasey, who does not know if waterboarding is torture. One wonders what else escapes the knowledge of the Mr. Mukasey.

Is he aware that U.S. law forbids the practice of waterboarding, as do numerous international treaties? He has stated that he must withhold judgment on it until he receives more information. Will he continue to 'withhold judgment' on this practice, that he himself calls 'repugnant,' until some nation starts waterboarding U.S. soldiers? One may well ask why other countries, especially those with whom the U.S. is at war, should hesitate to waterboard their prisoners if the U.S. will not refrain from doing so. The answer is common decency, but with the world's most powerful nation not demonstrating that trait, one cannot long expect other nations victimized by the United States to exhibit it.

Since this so-called 'interrogation technique' has been banned by domestic law, why, one could reasonably wonder, is there any debate about it? The answer is because for some bizarre reason, domestic law does not apply to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and President Bush has refused to say whether or not he has allowed that agency to practice it. At least he is not denying its use, as he originally and vehemently denied the existence of CIA-run prisons in foreign lands that don't even bother to discuss the morality of torture. Perhaps Mr. Bush can hold his head high with the knowledge that in the U.S., that beacon of peace, freedom and morality, the ethics of whether to torture or not to torture prisoners is discussed publicly in the hallowed halls of Congress. That the debate comes down to a quasi-conclusion of 'well, it's probably not all that bad as long as we call it something else' does not seem to diminish Mr. Bush's pride in the moral leadership of the United States.

If Mr. Bush, Mr. Mukasey and certainly Vice President Dick Cheney are, if not warm proponents of waterboarding, at least willing to consider its use, it might be helpful to know what the brouhaha is all about.

This particular 'interrogation method' is not new. It was very popular during the Italian Inquisition five-hundred years ago and has appeared now and then since. The Japanese used it at least sporadically during World War II, as did U.S. soldiers in Vietnam. More recently the Khmer Rouge used it on prisoners in Cambodia. And following the high moral standards set by Italian, Japanese and Cambodian torturers, the CIA listed waterboarding on its list of approved 'enhanced interrogation techniques.' My, my, what a pretty term!

This 'enhancement' involves strapping an individual down face up so he or she is completely immobile, on an inclined board with the person's feet raised above the head. The victim's face is covered, sometimes wrapped with cellophane. Sometimes the victim is gagged. The torturer then pours water repeatedly onto the person's face. This gives the impression of being submerged under waves and the victim believes he or she is drowning. The gag reflex activates as the person involuntarily tries to save him or herself from drowning. The experience, as related by those who have so been tortured, is terrifying.

This tame, academic description does not convey anything close to the enormity of the experience. Some information from the CIA which, for a time, waterboarded some of its employees as part of their training, may be beneficial. Those trainees lasted an average of fourteen seconds before begging to be released. And these were people who knew for a fact that they were not being drowned.

While the CIA will not classify waterboarding as torture, many CIA officials think it is useless because the victim will tell the 'interrogator' anything he or she wants to hear in order to stop the torture. In fact, this is one reason why torture is seen as unacceptable; information obtained in this way is generally useless.

As the term 'waterboarding' slowly found its way into the American consciousness, some interesting facts about its history were exposed. In 1947 the U.S. charged a Japanese army officer, Yukio Asano, with war crimes for using the technique on an American citizen. He was convicted and sentenced to fifteen years of hard labor. It appears that the U.S. view on waterboarding has changed considerably since that day. Will the U.S. now acquit Mr. Asano posthumously?

So this cruel practice is now, if not acceptable, at least not unacceptable, in the land of the free and the home of the brave. One wonders how long this archaic, savage and barbaric 'interrogation method' has been practiced by the United States. One further wonders what other such methods are and have been used since the U.S.'s immoral, illegal and obscene invasion of Iraq. Is it possible that U.S. soldiers have attached electrodes to the genitals of Iraqi prisoners? Have they stripped them and led them around with collars and leashes like dogs? Did they force naked prisoners to form human pyramids, and then photograph themselves standing in front of them, grinning happily? No, such cruel and inhumane behaviors are never tolerated by the United States; military training and shared accountability is such that these and/or similar practices would never occur. Oh wait, one forgets that all those things were perpetrated by U.S. soldiers on Iraqi prisoners in Baghdad. Well, slap a few low-level U.S. military wrists and we'll forget the whole thing.

Which seems to be just what the Democratic-controlled U.S. Congress has done. As they blathered on about Mr. Mukasey's refusal to term waterboarding torture; as they stood in righteous indignation that the highest law enforcement officer in the country would not endorse U.S. and international law; as they spluttered and dithered and then sought reasons to justify voting for him they apparently forgot not only their mandate, but their duty as well.

Mr. Bush had threatened to appoint an 'acting' Attorney General if Mr. Mukasey were not confirmed. Such an appointment would not require Congressional approval. Is Congress so deficient in clout, or perhaps it is spine that it lacks, that this action by the president would stand? Are the members of that governing body so willing to submit to presidential blackmail that they will confirm as the highest law enforcement officer in the country a man who will not support U.S. law that forbids waterboarding?

Mr. Bush, of course, has always bought into the jingoism that he personifies: any measure to protect the corporate interests of the exalted U.S. is justified. After all, this is the U.S., which can operate by different rules than the rest of the world. That seems to be sufficient reason to allow the torture of prisoners; the wiretapping of U.S. citizens; the dismissal of due process; restrictions on the rights to free speech and assembly, and a host of other measures Mr. Bush has taken in the name of freedom. One must give him credit: he has somehow caused Congress to interpret 'supporting the troops' as continuing the war for them, and equally as bizarre he has convinced them and many U.S. citizens that the best way for them to keep the rights of which they are so proud is to surrender them.

One naively looks to the next presidential election for some significant change. This will only mirror the disappointment of the last Congressional election that swept the war-mongering Republicans from office and replaced them with the war-tolerating Democrats. It took many years for the U.S. to learn important lessons from the mistakes of Vietnam, and not so many for them to forget them all. The confirmation of an Attorney General who condones torture is the latest in the U.S.'s long history of disgraceful injustice.

Robert Fantina is author of 'Desertion and the American Soldier: 1776--2006.'

:: Article nr. 38079 sent on 11-nov-2007 00:47 ECT


Thursday, October 25, 2007

CDC director denies she was censored on climate report

U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), chairwoman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, sent a letter to President Bush seeking all drafts of the written testimony for comparison with what Gerberding presented at a committee hearing Tuesday.

Boxer also asked the White House to disclose which officials were involved in reviewing her statement and what led to the deletion of nearly seven pages about the health consequences of climate change.

"I am deeply concerned that important scientific and health information was removed from the CDC Director's testimony at the last minute," Boxer said in the letter.

The Bush administration has repeatedly been accused of muzzling scientists on global warming and other issues. This year, for instance, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was accused of censoring its polar bear experts on the subject of climate change.

Allegations denied

Officials at the Atlanta-based Centers for Disease Control and Prevention denied they'd been censored. But an earlier version of the written testimony, reviewed by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, shows that Gerberding had planned to give the committee a detailed account of the agency's expectations of more frequent catastrophic weather events, diseases and other health effects of worldwide climate change.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said the testimony simply went through a normal review process to ensure it reflected current science.

Perino said nobody censored Gerberding.

"It was not watered-down in terms of its science. It wasn't watered-down in terms of the concerns that climate change raises for public health," she said.

Gerberding said Wednesday she was happy with her testimony and that the review process was normal. In a lunch-hour speech before the Atlanta Press Club, Gerberding said she made all the points to Congress that she wanted to make.

"This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard," Gerberding said of the furor. "I don't let people put words in my mouth. I spoke the truth to Congress."

The testimony went through many versions, perhaps as many as 40, Gerberding said. "This was not an issue of someone trying to cover up a connection between climate change and health," she said.

The 12-page draft reviewed by the AJC differs significantly from the final six-page version submitted to the Senate committee.

The shorter version focuses on public health preparedness for climate change, including how the CDC is tracking diseases, doing heat-stroke modeling for cities to predict vulnerable populations and helping local officials plan for environmental emergencies.

The draft version contained an additional six pages explaining why climate change is a public health concern. Deleted passages describe the expected impact of climate change, including new disease patterns and food and water shortages for some people.

The deleted testimony included predictions about the potential consequences of increased air pollution, the rampant growth of plants that cause allergies and the creation of environments that promote water- and food-borne disease.

"Catastrophic weather events such as heat waves and hurricanes are expected to become more frequent, severe, and costly," the deleted section said.

Dr. Michael McCally, executive director of Physicians for Social Responsibility, called the deletions "very significant." The committee only gave Gerberding and other witnesses five minutes each to testify, he said.

"You have to rely on written testimony. So her ability to communicate with the committee was constrained," McCally said. "The administration has censored various climate reports in the past. This may well be the case here."

More to the deletions?

To the Union of Concerned Scientists, it appears Gerberding was censored. "At first blush this is consistent with what we've seen throughout the Bush administration on climate change," said Michael Halpern, outreach coordinator of the group's Scientific Integrity Program.

Some environmentalists and science watchdogs questioned whether the deletions indicate that CDC's scientists will be prevented from studying and preventing climate-related health problems.

"It's my sense that CDC remains very interested in global warming as a central public health issue on which they plan to focus," said Kim Knowlton, a science fellow at the Natural Resources Defense Council. "Will they be allowed to follow through to the best of their ability? That is the question."

CDC has publicized protecting the public from the health effects of climate change as a major initiative. Dr. Howard Frumkin, director of CDC's National Center for Environmental Health, said that hasn't changed.

"I have not seen any barriers to our moving forward," Frumkin said Wednesday. "Fears that this is going to stop us are unfounded." Frumkin declined to discuss details how testimony written by his staff was reviewed by the White House.

Perino said she didn't know whether the various drafts of Gerberding's testimony would be released to Congress. CDC spokesman Tom Skinner said the agency hasn't yet received a request.

-- To reach staff writer Alison Young, call 404-526-7372.

Climate Change Testimony Was Edited by White House

An example of one of the changes made to Julie L. Gerberding's testimony.

Published: October 25, 2007

The White House made deep cuts in written testimony given to a Senate committee this week by the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on health risks posed by global warming, but the director agreed yesterday with administration officials who said the cuts were part of a normal review process and not aimed at minimizing the issue.

Skip to next paragraph

Dot Earth

A new blog about climate change, the environment and sustainability from The Times's Andrew C. Revkin.

Dr. Julie L. Gerberding, the agency’s director, said in a telephone interview that news reports and comments about the changes had made “a mountain out of a molehill.”

“I said everything I needed to say,” she said.

Dr. Gerberding, who addressed the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee on Tuesday, said she had freely spoken for more than a year about the implications for public health should warming from the buildup of greenhouse gases proceed as scientists project. Still, cuts made to her written testimony included the only statements casting the health risks from climate change as a problem, describing it variously as posing “difficult challenges” and as “a serious public health concern.”

The testimony that remained said, “Climate change is anticipated to have a broad range of impacts on the health of Americans and the nation’s public health infrastructure.” But a line saying “the public health effects of climate change remain largely unaddressed” was gone, and the testimony focused on the ways health agencies were already prepared to tackle any problems.

The changes were first reported Tuesday by The Associated Press, and the draft testimony, whose authenticity was not challenged by Bush administration, was disseminated to reporters and posted online yesterday by several private groups, including Climate Science Watch.

This shift in tone prompted criticisms of the administration by some Democratic lawmakers, including Senator Barbara Boxer of California, the committee’s chairwoman.

The cuts, done by the Office of Management and Budget last week, halved the 12-page draft testimony Dr. Gerberding submitted before her testimony.

Senator James M. Inhofe of Oklahoma, the ranking Republican on the committee, sided with the administration, said Matthew Dempsey, a spokesman. “All administrations edit testimony through the O.M.B. process,” Mr. Dempsey said.

Dana Perino, the White House press secretary, told reporters in a daily briefing yesterday that other agencies questioned whether the testimony adequately reflected the findings on health and climate of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations body that issued voluminous reviews of climate science this year.

“It was not watered down in terms of its science,” Ms. Perino said. “It wasn’t watered down in terms of the concerns that climate change raises for public health.”

Dr. Michael McCally, executive director of Physicians for Social Responsibility, who testified at the same hearing, called the cuts in the written testimony “a misuse of science and abuse of the legislative process.”

Lawrence K. Altman contributed reporting.

State Dept. Ousts Its Chief of Security

Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, October 25, 2007; Page A01

The State Department's security chief was forced to resign yesterday after a critical review found that his office had failed to adequately supervise private contractors protecting U.S. diplomats in Iraq.

Richard J. Griffin, a former Secret Service agent who was once in charge of presidential protection, was told by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's deputy, John D. Negroponte, to leave office by Nov. 1. Griffin's chief deputy, Gregory B. Starr, will become acting assistant secretary for diplomatic security.

Griffin is the first senior official to lose his job over the widening private-contractor scandal. Under fire from Congress, the U.S. military and the Iraqi government after the Sept. 16 contractor killing of 17 Iraqi civilians, Rice on Tuesday ordered extensive changes in diplomatic security arrangements in Iraq and pledged stronger oversight. A high-level panel she appointed to review the Iraq operation recommended Griffin's departure along with the other changes, according to State Department sources.

"I don't rule out . . . that there may even be other things that we must do," Rice told the House Foreign Relations Committee yesterday before Griffin's resignation was announced. She said she has designated Negroponte to recommend further steps after consulting with his Pentagon counterpart, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon R. England.

As she has concentrated on the Middle East peace process, Iran and Russia, Rice has increasingly turned major responsibility for hot-button issues -- including North Korea, Pakistan and Iraq -- over to Negroponte. He has taken the lead on management problems, such as the contractors, along with his longtime Foreign Service colleague Patrick Kennedy, a senior management official who served as Negroponte's management deputy when Negroponte was director of national intelligence, before he took the No. 2 post at the State Department.

The White House has nominated Kennedy to replace Henrietta H. Fore as undersecretary of state for management. That shift took a major step forward yesterday when the Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted to send Fore's long-delayed nomination as director of foreign assistance to the Senate floor. Senate aides said the committee may act on Kennedy's nomination as early as next week.

But the changes in security policy for Iraq and in her team are unlikely to temper rising criticism of Rice's management style. She is due to testify today before the House oversight committee, whose chairman, Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.), has accused the department's prime security contractor in Iraq, Blackwater Worldwide, of tax evasion; charged the department with papering over evidence of widespread corruption in the Iraqi government; and accused the State inspector general of failing to monitor shoddy work and overspending in construction of a new, $600 million U.S. Embassy in Baghdad.

Griffin's departure was widely seen as a positive move within the Bureau of Diplomatic Security (DS), where many senior agents have expressed growing concern over the dependence on and lack of supervision of private contractors. Several agents, who were not authorized to discuss internal matters publicly, said that DS was unprepared for the rapid rise in contractor use and described the agency as overwhelmed by the demands being made on it.

Those undercurrents were laid bare after the Sept. 16 incident involving Blackwater contractors in Baghdad's Nisoor Square. Although the military and the Iraqi government had previously complained about the use of excessive force by contractor security personnel, the incident sparked public outrage in Washington and Baghdad.

Although DS employs more than 30,000 people worldwide as technicians, building guards and couriers, it has only about 1,400 "special agents" trained in law enforcement and personal protection. Most of them are assigned to Washington and U.S. field offices, with fewer than half based at embassies and consulates overseas. The agency began contracting with private security companies to protect U.S. and other officials abroad in 1994, a practice that expanded with the reestablishment of a U.S. diplomatic presence in Afghanistan following the 2001 ouster of the Taliban government.

Protecting U.S. diplomats in Iraq, however, put far greater strains on DS resources. More than 1,000 private contractors from three U.S. companies -- Blackwater, DynCorp and Triple Canopy -- now provide security for all official U.S. civilians there. The contractors had been supervised by 36 DS agents until Rice doubled their numbers this month.

The dispatch of additional agents -- taken from a force of 100 SWAT team members normally held in reserve for worldwide security emergencies -- was one of the recommendations made by the panel, headed by Kennedy, along with the proposal that DS receive funding to hire 100 new agents. The panel also included Eric J. Boswell, a former DS chief whom Negroponte also brought into the National Intelligence Directorate.

It was Negroponte who carried to Rice the team's recommendation -- and his own -- that Griffin be fired. Rice agreed and sent Negroponte to carry it out.

After joining the Secret Service in 1971 in Chicago, Griffin eventually rose through the ranks to become deputy director. From 1997 to 2005, when President Bush nominated him as DS chief, he served as inspector general of the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Griffin announced his resignation at a meeting of his senior staff yesterday morning. In a memorandum to Bush, and a later e-mail to DS colleagues, he offered no reason for his departure.