Briefly: This piece by Christopher Ketcham relates what we know about the mysterious Israeli "movers" and "art students" who, it is alleged, played a role in the 911 disaster. Perhaps they were observers, perhaps they were participants, but on some level, they knew:
They had not been told the reasons for their arrest. Yet, according to DeCarlo's report, "this officer was told without question by the driver [Sivan Kurzberg],'We are Israeli. We are not your problem.Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are the problem.'" Another of the five Israelis, again without prompting, told Officer DeCarlo - falsely - that "we were on the West Side Highway in New York City during the incident". From inside the vehicle the officers, who were quickly joined by agents from the FBI, retrieved multiple passports and $4,700 in cash stuffed in a sock. According to New Jersey's Bergen Record, which on September 12 reported the arrest of the five Israelis, an investigator high up in the Bergen County law enforcement hierarchy stated that officers had also discovered in the vehicle "maps of the city with certain places highlighted. It looked like they're hooked in with this", the source told the Record, referring to the 9/11 attacks. "It looked like they knew what was going to happen when they were at Liberty State Park."
What is perhaps most damning is that the Israelis' celebration on the New Jersey waterfront occurred in the first sixteen minutes after the initial crash, when no one was aware this was a terrorist attack. In other words, from the time the first plane hit the north tower, at 8:46 a.m., to the time the second plane hit the south tower, at 9:02 a.m., the overwhelming assumption of news outlets and government officials was that the plane's impact was simply a terrible accident. It was only after the second plane hit that suspicions were aroused. Yet if the men were cheering for political reasons, as they reportedly told the FBI, they obviously believed they were witnessing a terrorist act, and not an accident.
After returning safely to Israel in the late autumn of 2001, three of the five New Jersey Israelis spoke on a national talk show that winter. Oded Ellner, who on the afternoon of September 11 had, like his compatriots, protested to arresting officer Sgt. Dennis Rivelli that ‘we're Israeli’, admitted to the interviewer: ‘We are coming from a country that experiences terror daily. Our purpose was to document the event’. By his own admission, then, Ellner stood on the New Jersey waterfront documenting with film and video a terrorist act before anyone knew it was a terrorist act.
I can add this. The owner of Urban Moving Systems was a man named Dominik Suter, then all of 31. He fled to Israel like a shot after the arrests of the students. Few people know that young Suter kept a second residence here in Los Angeles. It was an expensive apartment in an upscale area of the San Fernando Valley -- "South of the Boulevard," as we say in the Valley, the Boulevard being Ventura. We less-affluent northerners refer to those living in the hills of the south as SOBs. At any rate, few 31 year-old non-citizens could have afforded Suter's pad as a primary residence, let alone as a second home on the other side of the country.
The Israeli "moving company" scam deserved greater attention than it has ever received, and not just in the context of 911. Basically, the "students" would quote a low-ball price to get a gig. Once the furniture was loaded into the trucks, the movers would demand a much higher price before releasing the furniture. If the customer did not cough up, they kept the goods in a warehouse. This scam was played out all across the country; numerous complaints and legal actions resulted. I think most such operations have been shut down. If you know otherwise, please tell me.
The Israeli "art students" -- suspected of being spies, since they were often seen skulking around DEA offices on flimsy pretexts -- were also a strange lot. Many of them had multiple addresses, which is very odd when you consider that they were supposed to be ill-to-do students working illegally. One, based on the East Coast (as I recall), kept a mail drop at a Mailboxes, Etc. on Ventura Blvd., a couple of miles down the road from Suter's palatial digs. Another kept an apartment within walking distance of Suter's on the north side of the Boulevard.
For a while, these "art students" sold their crummy paintings (knock-offs of Thomas Kinkaide and Michelangelo, made by an assembly line in China) in front of the Sears in the Northridge Mall. I tried to chat up one of the girls working the booth; she seemed nice, but distant. Aside from admitting that she was from Israel, she would discuss nothing involving the operation. I tried speaking to her on a one-artist-to-another level, and quickly became convinced that she had no actual interest in art.
The guys working that spot perpetually glowered at everyone. I can't believe they sold much. Come to think of it, I don't recall ever seeing anyone at that booth making a sale.
(The comments are a no-tranny zone today. You don't like my rules? Go play elsewhere.)
My friend put his furniture in storage with this front company, unknowingly, and was lucky to get it back from the FBI months later so I know there was something going on here.
posted by Anonymous : 6:30 PM
There are two angles to 9/11 and every other attack in this country since 1993:
a) The Israeli Spy angle
b) The American-Fascist-FBI-Muslim brotherhood-Neo nazi-informant angle
Watch them chase tail and play grabass and wreck the entire country and the world in the name of MY RACE AND GOD IS BETTER THAN YOURS.
posted by Anonymous : 7:40 PM
My ex had this same problem with a moving company called 'Nice Jewish Boys.' I think it was a problem that somewhat pervaded the moving industry overall, and not just Israeli or Jewish-run companies.
In a tangentially related matter, the US Army War College did a study of the potential deployment of US armed forces along the Green Line or other demarked border between Israel and a Palestinian state as a peacekeeper force, attached to UN forces to be stationed there, and analyzed the players in the region, and any likely issues that could arise as problems there. The summary of their report was published in the Washington Times on 9/10 or 9/11, on the front page below the fold, iirc.
In it, the Mossad, whose motto is 'by deception you shall war' (something like that), is described as 'cunning and ruthless, able to create attacks on US forces and make them appear to be from Arab or Palestinian forces' (a close paraphrase).
How did such an incendiary judgment make it into an official US War College report? Well, Israelis did this before, several times, as when they bombed the King David hotel while wearing traditional Arab garments, or during the so-called Lavon affair. Some have argued that their attack on the USS Liberty during the '67 7 Days War would have been blamed on Egypt or another Arab nation, if only they'd succeeded in sinking the ship and killing any survivors (as they tried for hours, machine-gun strafing the men in the lifeboats in the water, a war crime).
It is interesting to note that among the movers and the art students were current and/or 'retired' Mossad agents, and recently 'retired' IDF soldiers whose specialties included using explosives. It is more interesting still to note that the vans these and other Israelis were apprehended in set off positive reactions in the explosive materials-sniffing dogs (or whatever method was used, I didn't look it up).
Nor was this a unique occurrence. An Israeli involved with the blind Sheik Rahman's '93 WTC attack, who fled the US for Israel in the immediate aftermath of that attack, had a similar strong positive reaction to explosives residue in his apartment.
By host rules, I'll pretend these facts in the public domain do not bring a certain banned topic to mind (grinning, ducking and running!), while muttering under my breath, Galileo-style.
Quoting a modern philosopher, Sean Penn, quoting Huey 'Kingfish' Long, if fascism ever comes to America, it will be in the guise of anti-[Islamo-]fascism (the brackets indicating my interpolation of that word, since the Kingfish, despite his prescience, could not and did not see that particular twist to the thing).
posted by Anonymous : 7:45 PM
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
posted by Anonymous : 12:02 AM
interesting ...u dont think it has anything to do with all that ecstasy? not just dancing while the towers burn, but really, selling chinese paintings and scamming people's furiture?? sounds to me like lotsa great places to stash stuff-- and that may sound like crazy talk but 'Namwise, after the golden triangle got taken over, the US had half a million junkies (up from 20,000 post wwii) and the real prof Alfred McCoy certainly talks about covert complicity, and Freeway Ricky Ross? "the ray crock of crack" pretty much singlehandedly arming the Contras (through poisening americas streets... ask Gary Webb-- oh wait). well, i was just cuious.... and think theres more reality to this question rather than a tranny question
I think the fact that these guys were first noticed around DEA offices probably has less to do with ecstasy, and more to do with the fact that the Arabs who allegedly carried out 9/11 were involved in drug smuggling, although I'm not sure what the exact connection is (maybe they were digging for info on these guys?).
Also, there's probably a connection between the Israeli movers/art students and Nick Berg, who certainly seemed like he could have been involved with Mossad from his hijinks in Iraq, and who supposedly allowed Zacarias Moussaoui to send terrorist-related emails from his computer and even gave him his password (despite being a telecommunications expert).
Personally, I think it's quite clear from all available evidence that these Arabs had nothing to do with 9/11 and that these Israelis were basically there to frame them for the job, though obviously we disagree on that...
posted by Anonymous : 6:20 AM
… interesting. I love the local aspect of this story. Maybe since it triggers images of visiting the rather young inheritor of the US inventor of the discount ticket (?that’s what the guy that took me there told me) and his wife high up in the mountains of a valley north of L.A. long, long ago.
Maybe I am naive: But I find it hard to combine a secret service front (paid by public money) with an enterprise that rips people off. Since the latter activity inevitably draws attention ...
What does it tells us that Dominik Suter flees back to Israel? If I try to imagine, I were that business man, involved in not so clean business transactions, and some of my people just got arrested, and were not released in the appropriate time frame. Hmmm?…
What happened to his apartment in upscale San Fernando Valley?
That the people selling the paintings aren’t really interested in art, does not seem to be very peculiar to me. Quite the opposite! This is something I would expect. I watched similar operations over here in Europe. What a pity you did not watch them more closely though, Joseph. Would we be more lucky in this respect if all of them had been good looking girls, nice but not much interested in art?
1) That moving scam is common across the country and especially in New Jersey. With all due respect, Joe, I'd remove that element because it's a blind alley in an otherwise stellar post, IMHO.
2) If my memory is correct, there were lots of troupes of Israeli "art students" selling this crap. Reports I've seen only have them around federal buildings -- and in them, when they could get away with it -- in particular those with investigative significance. Unlikely sales sites -- no one ever mentions seeing them outside WalMarts or generic street corners. Selling cheap art, itself, isn't weird, but the pattern is ... AND the fact that they all disappeared with a poof on 9/12, didn't they? Israeli art students were doing this for a year or two before 9/11, but who has seen them since?
3) Covert agents from any country have inconsistent access to funds. Ties to drug sales may be worth mention but probably tangential to the main arguments. Some comments seem a bit too insistent on what could be a red herring from the crux of this case.
4) I think this White House would like us to think Nick Berg was part of a plot, but my research into that points to likelihood it was mere coincidence that he sat by Moussaoui (a nut, remember) on the bus (and I don't remember emails to terrorists, exactly, that comment may be overstating). The fact Berg was internationally minded and not afraid to try to make a path as a young entrepreneur in Iraq don't alone raise red flags ... but some seem to insist on this a bit too much, IMHO, despite too little real info. If he was operating undercover for anyone, it was as a stooge for our CIA or Blackwater, which seems to be just the privatized NSA.
posted by Anonymous : 11:15 AM
I recently read a realy startling book that sort of supports your research Cannon. "The Protocols of Zion" is the title and it explains in some historical detail that behind all major strategies of world dominsation is a group of very powerful jews. Bankers, industrailists, lawyers, and rabbis and a smattering of Jewish mystics have been planning in every generation to gain power and sabatoge all resistance. Appearantly Hitler had read the same book and came to the same conclusions. Yikes!
posted by Anonymous : 11:28 AM
Wait a minute. Nick Berg didn't let Moussaoiu use his computer. The CNN link says it was someone else who later was linked to Moussaoiu, but it doesn't say that person was an art student or mover. Where do you get that info, anonymous?
Also, how does someone send email from a bus? Don't you have to have Internet, or can it be stored and sent later in a way I don't know of. Take the time machine back to when that bus trip in OK would have been (early 2000s or earlier?), and wi-fi wasn't common anywhere, if available at all, and certainly it wouldn't work on a bus. I'm having trouble imagining the scenario described.
Sorry for the distraction from the main point, just wondering.
posted by Anonymous : 11:30 AM
Before I make any comment, what's a "trannie"?
posted by Bob : 12:04 PM
Here is a link to Carl Cameron's 4 part Faux News investigation.
Intel agencies have often used front companies, both to generate income, and to launder otherwise obtained income. Part of the 'income generation' methods of at least our own intel groups (and likely, others' as well) include financial frauds on a substantial scale, ranging from a simple 'bust out' operation to complex financial maneuvers you'd need an MBA to understand.
So it isn't surprising to imagine a front company for an intel group engaging in fraud to get increased unaccountable cash flow-- that would be more the standard operating procedure. After all, as Pete Brewton has documented in his book 'The CIA, the Mafia, and George Bush,' even a cursory look without subpoena power at the staggering S&L losses of the late '80s/early '90s period immediately shows a substantial percentage of the losses were CIA or joint CIA/Mafia operations, with the missing purloined funds tracked ultimately to spooky plus mobbed up off-shore bank accounts.
There was nothing subtle about hijacking billions of dollars out of S&Ls, but our intel boys did it anyway, and without consequence or public blame.
posted by Anonymous : 2:13 PM
Honestly, why would an operation funded by Mossad have to shake down normal people for the trivial amount they might get in a moving fee?
And if the 'art students' aren't into selling art what are they supposed to be doing? These people sound more like Irish Travellers than secret agents, or, perhaps more plausibly, a cult associated with the Orthodox crackpots, a sort of Enthusiastic Youth Brigade. If they were a real part of some intelligence operation, hanging around outside buildings is pretty amatuerish.
posted by badrbinbadbush : 4:58 PM
An Enthusiastic Youth Brigade who were trying to connect with Arab drug operations to see what they could get, is what I was driving at, and, lucky them, got advanced word of 9/11.
posted by badrbinbadbush : 5:01 PM
I think it's important to distinguish between Israeli government intelligence operations and what amount to intelligence operations run from, or in association with, the Orthodox settler community and its' wide ramifications and variety of enthusiasts.
For instance there was some strange story of armed Israelis wandering around in government buildings in Mexico City on 9/11, a story so daft most people have just forgotten about it. It would be absolutely implausible for any real intelligence operatives to be doing something like that, but it would be totally in character for enthusiastic amateurs, especially if they're religious maniacs.
Broad generic aspersions only cloud the subject further and can only help and encourage such people.
Wait a minute. Nick Berg didn't let Moussaoiu use his computer. The CNN link says it was someone else who later was linked to Moussaoiu, but it doesn't say that person was an art student or mover. Where do you get that info, anonymous?
Exactly what the CNN article suggests happened is not clear to me, but somehow emails sent by Moussaoui were tracked to Nick Berg's computer, or email address, or something.
Also, how does someone send email from a bus? Don't you have to have Internet, or can it be stored and sent later in a way I don't know of.
I've had the same question as you, about how emails can be sent from a bus - which is why I think this whole story is a lame excuse. I think Berg was either somehow involved with Moussaoui or else was tracking him and possibly setting him up (with bogus emails relating to terrorist activity).
Either way, we have a suspicious character trailing one of the alleged 9/11 plotters, which sounds quite a lot like the story of the Israeli art students following the alleged hijackers down in Florida. I'm suggesting that there's likely a connection (obviously that's not in the CNN article, which suggests that this is just some kind of spectacular coincidence).
posted by Anonymous : 10:48 PM
Arrested by the sugar unionists, now that's really amatuer hour.
The important thing in that story is the personal involvement of Sharon, the crookedest man Israel has ever seen.
It sounds very unlikely that a Prime Minister would even admit he'd heard of such a thing if it really did involve a government intelligence operation.
On the other hand, if it involved the Orthodox settlers and/or some crime group Sharon did business with, then we can easily see him laying it on thick.
All the crookedness in Israel arises from the Conservatives and the Russians.
The second article you link to is signed Red Kalki, which Wikipedia describes (at the bottom of the article on Kalki),
"There is currently a Neo-Nazi news agency in Argentina that operates under the name Red Kalki, and his leader, Alejandro Biondini (President of the New Triumph Party and founder of Ciudad Libertad de Opinion), has proclaimed he is Kalki."
So I think it's utter horseshit.
posted by badrbinbadbush : 1:24 PM
Yeah- when I moved out of NYC in 2004 I had this Israeli operated moving company too. They didn't scam me financially, but they took far too long to deliver -- almost a month, and they also broke some things. But they deducted the price for what was broken. There does appear to be some strange Israeli Moving thing....still. When I learned they were Israeli (which was after the fact-they conceal it up until the point of pick up), I had to laugh, having known all about the dance and dash movers on 9/11.
Anyway-- the ecstasy question is a very good point--with room for more exploration. I have heard about the Israeli student mall kiosks, but I haven't seen any---but I rarely go to the mall.
How gratifying is this, eh?? As predicted, not only do we see guilty verdicts, the jury was - and very appropriately so - meticulous and scrutinizing. There is something to be said for the training education, even advanced degrees, can bring to the table.
Enough chest-thumping; I'd like to alert everyone to attend carefully to the rhetoric we will now hear from the Libby defenders, both strong and weak.
They will be refusing to comment because the case is "ongoing." They will be claiming the jury was confused and/or partisan. They will be asking us all to move on and get to the business of governing. They will be continuing to cover Anna Nicole Smith.
They will be claiming Libby did not commit "this" crime, and therefore this investigation and trial should have never moved forward anyway. They of course miss the important point that lying to the FBI, committing perjury under oath in testimony to a Grand Jury, and obstructing justice are crimes. Very serious crimes.
Which of course raises the more important and far more interesting question as to just why Cheney and Libby would risk so much in order to out this CIA agent. There is absolutely NO talk about this, not even on the premiere news source on this scandal and the trial, firedoglake. Don't get me wrong; those folks over there, Jane and Christy and Marcy and Pac and the lot of 'em all deserve the highest praise, and they're getting it. However, this question cannot be left to die. I mentioned it in the above linked post, and Joe then followed up on it with more detail.
And for this reason, I encourage everyone out there to consider this Libby trial and verdict just the tip of the iceberg, and keep your eyes and ears and voices wide open to these questions. Namely, what about Plame's specific duties at the CIA? What of Brewster-Jennings? What of possible plans to plant WMDs in Iraq, and what might Brewster-Jennings have had to do with it? What is the possibility that Cheney managed to never meet Plame in his several visits to Langley in the run-up to war? How early did he know of her relationship to Wilson? And how much of this will come out in the civil suit depositions, the upcoming movie, and - hopefully - Congressional hearings?
This last source we can have some influence over, so get on the horn; you know what to do.
Oh, and so as not to leave this important specter hovering over this entire scandal, we'll also be seeing a whole lot of rhetoric about the role of the press in all this. Give that some very serious thought, because the First Amendment is under siege, freedom of the press not least among them. I'll be pondering the pressing press issues within the week, and will be most interested in your input.
Meanwhile, though, by all means - celebrate! This verdict makes me so damn proud to be an American. (And even more proud Fitz is one, too!) Permalink
If Plame knew anything about plans to plant WMD in Iraq then wouldn't she say so?
Still, I could see even if Plame didn't know, but other associates did know, and betraying Plame was a message to them.
posted by Anonymous : 3:40 PM
The film is now of great interest to me, since it seems to be the only way to get some people to follow a story like this one...
Still, the hard core Bush supporters will denounce any product of "Big Hollywood." By the way, W actually once used that term to describe his term as governor: "Standing up to Big Hollywood." As though this place actually posed a threat of any sort to Texas...
miss p, i doubt that plame would be in a position to say so. remember, she's an cia agent, not a free agent. if she said anything, she'd also have to expose how she might come to know such things, which would then expose cia secrets about brewster-jennings, etc. not likely.
the way she's played it has been exceedingly quiet; indeed, silent. it doesn't surprise me one bit she hasn't said anything. the weapons were never planted; mission accomplished, keep your eye on the ball.
plus, given plame's role as director of the joint task force on iraq, and her important role with brewster-jennings, there has to be ample doubt she didn't know and others did. besides, her key role is just too coincidental.
and joe, those hard-core bush supporters are rapidly becoming a rare breed. should we be too worried about what they think about a film? as i recall, hard-core nixon supporters didn't think much of 'all the president's men,' but that didn't alter the fact that it was a really fine piece of work. won oscars. and it did a good job of presenting the facts. i watched it again recently; pretty impressive. if they can do that with the plame case, it could get mighty interesting.
posted by dr. elsewhere : 10:52 PM
I remember reading somewhere that Plame's group was investigating weapons sales and drug smuggling. Turkey and Saudi Arabia were 2 of the countries mentioned. It must be convenient for some to have that investigation destroyed as the poppy fields in Afghanistan began producing again. Didn't this also happen shortly before the armed 'insurgency' in Iraq?
posted by Anonymous : 3:12 AM
Do you think there is a relationship between Miller's interest in Iraq WMD, Scooter's note to her about needing to cover Iranian WMD, and need to betray of Plame?
posted by Anonymous : 10:07 AM
miss p, oh god yes, i do think there is some connection between miller's interests in wmd - not to mention her relationship with david kelly (doubt he's resting in peace) - and plame. in fact, did i read somewhere that plame may have been one of her sources?
hm. this is a thought that has popped into my head as i type, but as per your question, what if plame's brewster-jennings work was going 'too well' for those who were interested in the more contraband efforts? then miller's use of plame as a source would help get info about what she (and the cia) knew about what was going on.
boy, that is some wild speculation, but there it is.
and anon, i have no doubt turkey at least is involved with all this. that is why i mentioned sibel edmonds in the first post on the topic. i know she has never overtly mentioned anything like this, but she actually cannot say too much anyway. and that turkey connection is just too juicy, eh? and sibel did say that when you look at the whole thing, all the same players keep coming up.
posted by dr. elsewhere : 1:13 PM
dr. e., that's where I was going with the thought.
Her potential disingenousness struck me during her testimony where she emphasized that she didn't even recognize Libby at first when she saw him in Colorado. Duh, he was disguised and she stated the obvious a little too strongly - a red herring to me.
posted by Anonymous : 2:31 PM
Though I was thinking of Miller as an informant for Libby...
posted by Anonymous : 9:00 PM
informant for libby? oh, well; that, too!
posted by dr. elsewhere : 10:48 PM
On October 28th, 2005, on the show "4 a Closer Look", Indira Singh gave up some background on Fitzgerald. She basically called him a tool.
Is Singh on the level? Don't know, but she called it on this case, far as I can tell.
Strange, innit, how friends who own trucks suddenly stop answering the phone the moment word gets out that you are changing residences? I finally, as of a few hours ago, acquired an actual desk, upon which my computer now rests. No longer must I write posts while sitting in the half-lotus position on the floor.
Folks can't stop talking about Ann Coulter now that she has made the segue from nasty to nutsy. Everyone seems to be wondering when she's going to grab the hair clippers.
A reader has asked me how I can fairly score her for her hateful remarks, when my own commentary has made her the butt of some rather harsh attempts at humor. I take my cue from Marv's great line in Sin City: "I love hit men. No matter what you do to them, you don't feel bad."
Lydia Cornell's book on Coulter is not out yet. It has gone through several titles; the most recent one seems to be BLOGGING WITH THE DEVIL or How to Talk to Ann Coulter If You Must. Her co-author is Texas conservative Dan Borchers, who was forcibly ejected from the Conservative Political Action Conference which landed Ann in so much hot water. They expelled him and kept her: That decision says something about the modern Republican party, eh wot?
Also quite telling are these words from Lydia Cornell:
I personally had suffered through a year of frightening death threats, hate mail, slander, hackers and people coming to our front door - after Ann Coulter posted my home number and private information on her website in retaliation for an article I wrote about her "extermination-speak," Death is Sexier than Sex, to Ann Coulter”. We had to call the FBI after our trash cans were lit on fire. On the flip side, I also received tons of love mail - and a Marine combat vet sent me his Purple Heart for standing up to Coulter. This entire thing took a much more sinister turn, which is described in our upcoming book.
Meanwhile, a publicist sent me a column titled "Is Ann Coulter a Woman or a Man?" by Melinda Pillsbury Foster. Looks like the is-she-or-isn't-she-a-she question is going mainstream. The publicist neglected to include a link to the published piece, so I will take the liberty of reprinting a large chunk of the thing here:
Is Ann Coulter a woman or a man?
The question has grown in our minds over the last ten years until now many of us can't even see her without wondering. It was Dan Borchers who first pointed out that she had an Adams Apple. Others then began pointing out other strange physical features, strange on a woman anyway. I was slow; but then I began to see what they meant around the time her behavior started to shock me. Ann is not lady-like. She says very nasty things about people, things that are hurtful and irrelevant. Some people say she does this to shock and so engage people's minds in a real dialogue, but few believe that any more. It does pay well. It is the shocking aspect that keeps her and her books selling.
It is well known that one of Ann's best friends is Matt Drudge, an out of the closet gay guy who also figures prominently as a NeoCon operative. They hang out together. That is fine, there is nothing wrong with being gay.
Physical characteristics. No kids. Never married. Always glamorous.
As she has aged, between what seems to be an ongoing course of treatments, she looks more and more like a guy. This may come as a surprise to you but men and women are different. Most Liberals like to deny this but hormones do tell. On the bell curve of behavior males and females act differently.
Ann Coulter acts like a man dressed up like a woman. Aggressive, nasty, mean spirited, and entirely focused on getting her own way, no matter what. Ask Dan Borchers about the aggressive behavior.
Personally, I decided she was a man a while ago. Having spent a life time raising little people, children, of both genders (3 girls 2 boys) to adulthood I decided that Coulter was not like any woman I had ever known from PTA or elsewhere. It would be nice if she would have a DNA test.
I would put a question mark beside the word "glamorous." Ann Coulter ain't no Audrey Hepburn.
As for aggressive, nasty and mean-spirited -- well, here is the opening paragraph of a recent Ann column:
Even right-wingers who know that "global warming" is a crock do not seem to grasp what the tree-huggers are demanding. Liberals want mass starvation and human devastation.
Ah yes. If you are fool enough to believe what virtually all of the world's scientists are saying about global warming, then your vision of paradise must contain lots of starvation and devastation. And, I guess, anal sex.
This is hilarious, i forget where i got this link, but apparently one of the poster boy professional right wing victims, who stands up for marines and oppressed conservatives on campus, posed for some nice pictures with Anndy Coulter, as seen at link.
He also seems to have a previous career in that well-known building block to stepping in Karl Rove's shoes, a Gay Porn career in his past.
posted by Anonymous : 9:55 AM
More interesting than Coulter herself -- whether lady or gentleman -- is the media's remarkable tolerance for controversy (as long) apparently as it issues from the lunatic fringe right.
If broadcasters simply wanted to get viewers' blood boiling, there are any number of credentialed commentators and historians who would be happy to point out that the U.S. is a terrorist state and that GWB is a war criminal.
And yet this kind of "outrage" isn't permitted on the national airwaves (for that matter, you won't find it at TPM). One wishes that CNN, Chris Matthews and all the other whores would explain why reasoned criticism of the U.S. is verboten, but the rants of Ann Coulter are somehow considered newsworthy and merit a respectful hearing.lx
I don't get this Melinda Pillsbury Foster quote: "This may come as a surprise to you but men and women are different. Most Liberals like to deny this but hormones do tell."
It comes as a surprise to me that "most liberals" deny that men and women are different.
They do? I didn't know that.
I hang out with liberals. I am a liberal. It has never occurred to me or any of the people I hang with that hormones don't make women different from men. It has never occurred to me that men are not different from women.
WTF is she talking about?
I buy her premise about Coulter. Of course Coulter is a man. But that remark about liberals thinking there is no difference between men and women is totally nutsoid.
In case you woke up late, the jury declared Scooter Libby guilty on four out of five charges. Since he was acquitted of one charge, Fox could, I suppose, argue that this crawling text is technically accurate.
As you know, the Murdochian hordes have tried this sort of thing before. Was it twice or three times that Fox identified the disgraced Mark Foley as a Democrat? Obviously, this kind of thing does not happen by accident. Such puerile tactics must work.
Soon, you may expect to see the following words crawl their way beneath Brit Hume's mug: BUSH TRIES TO END WAR STARTED BY CLINTON.
Sure they do. Cheney has already claimed developing health problems, possibly a prelude to his leaving office prematurely. This would be the case that prompted that decision, IMO.
posted by Anonymous : 4:08 PM
It's funny how Fox helped steal an election, and then helped lie us into a war no one wants and that is bankrupting the country. So how is another VIETNAM doing ANYTHING but weakening us and helping countries like China and Russia?
WHO OWNS Fox News???? WHO IS FUNDING THEM? The majority of AMERICANS want OUT of Iraq. Is it simply the Elite who prop it up or what? Maybe its like the Washington Times which ALSO wants us bogged down in a war and is funded by cultists who are funded by dirty money from illegal activities.
In the America of old wouldn't these guys have been shut down a long time ago? What gives?
posted by Anonymous : 4:21 PM
Rupert Murdoch (who owns Fox News) will support any political program if the policies of the acting party promote his business interests.
Republicans cut his taxes and loosened what little regulatory constraint remained after Clinton's Telecommunications Act, so he'll say and do anything to promote continued Republican rule, even if it means support of a disastrous and unpopular war.
If Iraq were a "Democrat war", you can be sure Rupert would be on the other side -- as he was during Clinton's Haiti intervention and the Kosovo bombing. Patriotism, Fox News style, means whatever outrage Republicans can come up with. Doesn't matter in the least what it may be.
posted by Anonymous : 10:34 PM
I also believe Shooter's sudden rash of health "problems" are probably a prelude to his exit. Get ready for VP Jackboots, as Condoliesalot Rice is almost certain to get the nod from her "husband."
Maybe they have it right, it is rather surprising he was found innocent of anything :) If you look at it that way, the screen shot is a real laugh!
posted by Anonymous : 3:32 PM
this is quite an eye opener--I have no doubts that we are headed for a military police state...here is the confirmation:
Operation Falcon and the Looming Police State by Mike Whitney
Operation Falcon: Blueprint for removing dissidents and political rivals
The Bush administration has carried out three massive sweeps in the last two years, rolling up more than 30,000 minor crooks and criminals, without as much as a whimper of protest from the public.
Operation Falcon is the clearest indication yet that the Bush administration is fine-tuning its shock-troops so it can roll up tens of thousands of people at a moment’s notice and toss them into the newly-built Halliburton detention centers. This should be a red flag for anyone who cares at all about human rights, civil liberties, or simply saving his own skin.
Operation Falcon was allegedly the brainchild of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and his counterpart in the US Marshal's office, (Director) Ben Reyna. But its roots go much deeper into the nexus of right-wing Washington think tanks where fantasies of autocratic government have a long history. The name, Falcon, is an acronym for "Federal and Local Cops Organized Nationally." It relates to the more than 960 state, local and federal agencies which are directly involved in the administration’s expansive criminal dragnets.
Typically, law enforcement agencies are protective of their own turf and wary of outside intervention. The Falcon program overrides these concerns by streamlining the information-sharing processes and setting up a chain-of-command structure that radiates from the Justice Department. This removes many of the traditional obstacles to agency interface. It also relocates the levers of power in Washington where thy can be manned by members of the Bush administration.
Dictatorships require strong centralized authority and the Falcon program is a logical corollary of that ambition. It creates new inroads for Bush to assume greater control over the nationwide police-state apparatus. That alone should be sufficient reason for alarm.
The first Operation Falcon took place during the week of April 4 to April 10, 2005. According to the US Marshal’s official website, "The emphasis centered on gang related crimes, homicides, crimes involving use of a weapon, crimes against children and the elderly, crimes involving sexual assaults, organized crime and drug related fugitives, and other crimes of violence." More than 10,000 criminal suspects were arrested in a matter of days. It was the largest criminal sweep in the nation’s history and, according to U.S. Marshall chief Ben Reyna, "produced the largest number of arrests ever recorded during a single initiative." The Washington Times noted, "The sweep was a virtual clearinghouse for warrants on drug, gang, gun and sex-offender suspects nationwide."
The emphasis was clearly on quantity not quality.
Still, this doesn’t explain why state and federal agencies had to be integrated with local law enforcement simply to carry out routine police work.
More importantly, it doesn’t explain why local police ignored their duty to protect the public just so they could coordinate with outside agencies. According to one report "162 accused or convicted of murder" were picked up in the first sweep. That means that the police knowingly left murderers on the street and put the public at risk while they orchestrated their raids with federal agencies.
That’s irresponsible. It also suggests that there may be a more sinister motive behind the program than just ensuring public safety. The plan appears to have been devised to enhance the powers of the "unitary" executive by putting state and local law enforcement under federal supervision. Once again, it’s an attempt by the administration to extend its grip to the state and local level. We saw a similar strategy unfold after Hurricane Katrina when the Bush administration used the tragedy to seize control of local police and National Guard units so they could establish de facto martial law. Troops, armored vehicles and mercenaries were deployed to New Orleans to fight lawlessness and looting even though desperate people were still stranded on their rooftops waiting for food, water and medical attention.
Operation FALCON II was another massive dragnet which covered the western half of the country and focused primarily on "violent sex offenders". The raids took place from April 17-23, and succeeded in apprehending 9,037 alleged fugitives. The US Marshals web site boasts that the operation "took some of the country's most dangerous wanted criminals off the streets and made America's communities safer".
Nonsense. Despite the claims of success, only 462 "violent sex crime" suspects were arrested, along with 1,094 "unregistered sex offenders" and other minor "sex crime" suspects. That leaves 7,481 suspects who were rounded up for other unrelated reasons.
Who are they and what crime did they commit? Were these drug violations, dads who were delinquent on child-support payments, traffic tickets, jay-walking?!?
7,481 people who were incarcerated are unaccounted by the government’s estimate. This means that the bulk of them were probably undocumented workers who were shunted off to the INS (Immigration and Naturalization) or dispatched to Cheney’s tent-city gulags in western Texas. (See: Democracy Now "Human Rights Groups Call for Closure of Texas Jail Holding Undocumented Immigrants" 2-23-07)
Similar inconsistencies appear in "Operation FALCON III, which covered the eastern half of the country from October 22 - 28, 2006." State, local and federal police-units arrested 10,773 fugitives; including 1,659 sex offenders, 971 unregistered sex offenders, 364 gang members, 140 homicide suspects, and 3,609 drug violations. Once again, the US Marshal’s official tally doesn’t pencil out. This time, 4,030 extra people were rounded up without any further explanation.
Who are they and have they been charged with a crime?
Furthermore, sex offenders, drug users and gang-bangers are not what we normally consider "some of the country's most dangerous wanted criminals". In fact, there are indications that the great majority of these people are not violent at all. For example, of the 30,110 total fugitives who were apprehended in all three Falcon sweeps, a measly 586 firearms were seized.
Clearly, the people who were arrested for the most part were not "armed and dangerous" nor were they a serious threat to public safety. They were probably just the unwitting victims of an overzealous US Marshals office and an ideologically-driven Justice Department.
So, what was the real impetus for the Falcon raids? Was it just a bean-counting exercise to see how many people would fit in the back of a Paddy-wagon or are they a dress rehearsal for future crackdowns on potential enemies of the state?
Bogus News Reports
The Falcon operation illustrates the incestuous relationship between the media and the state. They are two wings on the same plane. The Justice Department provided the TV networks with official footage of policemen and government agents raiding homes and handcuffing suspects; and the media dutifully aired the video on stations across the country. The scenes were accompanied by a reassuring commentary lauding the administration’s new crime fighting strategies and linking homeland security with the nebulous war on terror.
Attorney General Gonzales told reporters, "Operation FALCON is an excellent example of President Bush’s direction and the Justice Department’s dedication to deal both with the terrorist threat and traditional violent crime." He added, "This joint effort shows the commitment of our federal, state, and local partners to make our neighborhoods safer, and it has led to the highest number of arrests ever recorded for a single initiative of its kind."
So far, not one of the more than 30,000 victims has been charged with a terror-related crime.
The media-hype surrounding the raids has been celebratory and uniform; cookie-cutter articles appeared throughout the US press (most of them unsourced) highlighting the cooperation between the divers agencies while providing an upbeat account of what amounts to police repression. Thousands of nearly identical articles appeared in the nation’s newspapers which seem to have been authored by high-ranking officials at Homeland Security and protégés of George Orwell; although the difference between the two is far from certain.
Even stranger, most of the articles in the mainstream media can no longer be retrieved via a Google search. They seem to have vanished into the black-hole of Homeland propaganda.
No matter. If the media was supposed to make Gestapo-like crackdowns look like normal police operations; they succeeded admirably. Mission accomplished.
Former Governor of Louisiana, Huey Long once opined, "When fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in an American flag." Indeed, he could have added that the corporate media will gladly provide the flag and the public relations campaign as they have with Falcon.
Falcon; new drills for a new world order
The Falcon operations can only be understood in the broader context of the ongoing assault on the constitutional system of checks and balances; including the repeal of habeas corpus, warrantless wiretaps and searches, and the use of torture.
For the last 6 years, the Bush administration has been busy dismantling the legal safeguards which protect the citizen from the arbitrary and, oftentimes, ruthless actions of the state. To that end, detention camps are being prepared by Halliburton within the U.S., secret courts have been established which deny due process of law, American citizens are arrested without charge, law enforcement is increasingly militarized, and the media has strengthened its alliance with the central government.
Additionally, in October 2006, George Bush quietly changed the Insurrection Act, which prevented the President from deploying troops inside the United States. Bush’s revision effectively overturns the Posse Comitatus Act which put strict limits on the executive’s power to use US troops in domestic situations. Just days earlier Bush signed a similar bill, "The John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007" which gives Bush the power to take command of National Guard units across the country which are traditionally under the control of the state governors.
Without fanfare, Bush has taken control of all armed forces and militias inside and outside of the country and now has a monopoly on all the state-sanctioned tools of organized violence. It’s a coup that could never have succeeded without the tacit cooperation of the media.
Bush is now free to declare martial law in response to a natural disaster, a pandemic or a terrorist attack. The congress is powerless to stop him.
Also, Bush recently signed the Military Commissions Act of 2006, which allows the president to arbitrarily declare citizens and non citizens "enemy combatants" and imprison them indefinitely without charge. The new law gives Bush the authority to disregard the Geneva Conventions and the 8th amendment’s ban on "cruel and unusual" punishment and apply "harsh interrogation" which may include torture. The act effectively repeals habeas corpus, the cornerstone of American jurisprudence and the Bill of Rights.
The Military Commissions Act cannot coexist with the US Constitution; the two are mutually exclusive.
The Military Commissions Act, The John Warner Defense Authorization Act, the Homeland Security Act, the Patriot Act, and the myriad presidential signing statements have conferred absolute power on George Bush. The question is whether or not some incident will arise that will persuade Bush to use his extraordinary new powers.
General Tommy Franks predicted that a "massive, casualty producing event" might cause "our population to question our own Constitution and begin to militarize our country;" a scenario that many see as likely now.
Is that it? Will another terrorist attack provide the rationale for overturning republican government and declaring martial law?
If so, then we should know what to expect.
According to FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) it would mean "the suspension of the normal functions of civilian government, implying the cancellation or postponement of state and federal elections." (Global Research) It would also "close public and government facilities not critical for continuity of essential operations." (FEMA)
Northern Command would assume control and under "the classified 'Continuity of Government" (COG) Operations Plan' a secret 'shadow government' would become functional, redeploying key staff to secret locations." (Global Research)
Also, "all forms of public gatherings or citizen's protests which question the legitimacy of the emergency procedures and the installation of a police state" would be banned. The military would be deployed to carry out "police and judicial" functions.
Martial law in the US would be applied with the utmost attention to public sensibilities and perceptions, avoiding the garish display of force we see in Iraq. It would be a "kinder and gentler" martial law with a limited number of military personnel on the streets (just enough to remind us that things have changed) and an emphasis on "preemptive" policing operations. (Expect Falcons’ 4, 5 and 6 etc) It would probably be disguised by a carefully crafted public relations campaign and a predictably cheery moniker, such as, "The Security Enhancement and Homeland Fortification Act". The possibilities are limitless.
The Bush administration is also prepared if some unforeseen tragedy befalls congress, like another anthrax attack.
In fact, the American Enterprise Institute, to which the Bush team is closely aligned, has already "issued proposals for the operation of Congress following a catastrophic terrorist attack". They advocate the "APPOINTING" of individuals to the House of Representatives "to fill the seats of dead or incapacitated members, a first in American history" "The Continuity of Government Commission is self-commissioned', its members being neither elected nor appointed by any government body and mostly made up of professional lobbyists". (Read the whole article: http://www.conservativeusa.org/cog-ronpaul.htm ) (Coincidentally, Newsweek article "White House Rehearses for Domestic Attack" 2-23-07; "The White House is staging a high-level exercise Saturday to test responses to the prospect of a massive domestic terrorist attack." These drills are a critical part of the C.O.G. regimen dating back to the Reagan administration)
According to the AEI’s plan, the future United States congress will be comprised of lobbyists and industry representatives. What else would one expect from an organization that believes that corporate interests should determine policy?
These are the chilling precedents which have paved the way for further government lawlessness and abuse. They foreshadow the ominous transition from representative government to autocratic rule; from inalienable rights to martial law.
The Falcon operations are just a small part of this larger paradigm. The program is not designed for rounding up minor crooks and drug dealers, (which no one really cares about anyway) but for removing leftists, dissidents and political rivals. These are the real targets. The power of the state is measured in terms of how effectively it defeats or eliminates its enemies. And, the Bush administration has shown a remarkable aptitude for crushing its rivals.
The Crawford Fuehrer
One day, after a particularly savage domestic purge; we can expect President Bush to stride to the presidential podium and reiterate the same words that were uttered by his German predecessor 60 years ago:
"If anyone reproaches me and asks why I did not resort to the regular courts of justice, then all I can say is this: In this hour I was responsible for the fate of the American people, and thereby I became the supreme judge of the American people….Everyone must know for all future time that if he raises his hand to strike the State, then certain death is his lot."
posted by Anonymous : 4:08 PM
anonymous, we can all read. Post a brief summary and a link next time please.
A little more than a day ago, one of the right-wing yak-yak-yakkers on Los Angeles talk radio station KFI (Konservative Fools & Idiots, or so I call it) tried to make the case that the Walter Reed scandal can be traced to the "fact" that liberals do not care about the folks who serve in the military.
Yep, it's our fault. Don't blame the Bush administration.
Today, we learn that Fox News has devoted twelve times more coverage to the death of Anna Nichol Smith than to the Walter Reed scandal.
And I've yet to encounter any right-wing pundit willing to discuss the scandals that grabbed the attention of Randi Rhodes this afternoon. She described the plight of certain Iraq war veterans who had signed away their rights to disability recompense, despite being unable to look after their own affairs, due to brain injury or heavy pain medication.
The Bush administration is, in fact, directly and solely responsible for this mess. Ideologues have deliberately gutted the Veterans Administration in order to "prove" to the public that government-provided health care cannot work. They want to privatize the system, which means placing it into place the hands of cronies.
I hope the wounded and sick veterans now facing homelessness are reconsidering their votes for the Republican party.
My Dad served in Korea. Anyone who thinks I don't care about veterans is a fool.
(By the way, as long as we are discussing veterans' issues, perhaps someone will one day reveal just what a certain "Jolly" doctor at UCLA was doing over at the nearby Veterans' hospital? I've heard some rather bizarre rumors...)
I used to work with some folks at Disney in Burbank who now work at Fox. a few of them listens to Rush everyday for the past 12 years--it is no wonder that one of them ended up at Fox ?
anyway, I bring this up because at our social gatherings there is just no way to even raise any points about the lies that Rush and Hannity spew. We have to completely avoid any talk of politics to have any kind of a conversation.
My old acquaintance has just made up his mind like so many of rush's and fox's audience and they just feed on anything to reinforce their existing rightwing views--i.e. liberals are like commies, homos should be jailed, minorities on welfare should be exiled back to the country of their origin to avoid being a tax burden, etc. and ad nauseum.
There have been studies about these folks who have their minds made up and refuse to listen to anyone or anything that contradicts what they already believe.
Rightwing talk radio has done alot of damage over the past few decades because there are more of these well financed radio shows and DJ's owned by Clear Channel for example than there are of struggling air america affiliates and independent radio stations.
so, anyone who doesn't see the world as rush, Hannity, and coutler sees it, is just completely screwed, a sitting duck, in my opinion for the final coup d'grace with Cheney directing us into a secret war with Iran --he's doing this RIGHT NOW using outsourced PRIVATE CONTRACTORS--and then once the "secret war" gets big enough and public enough he can use it to declare martial law.
In the post below, we discuss film-maker Martin Durkin and his quaint notion that the modern environmental movement is a massive conspiracy. If you, like me, suspect that the "conspirators" are on to something, you may want to learn more about this:
Thermal depolymerization, or, to use the more recent nomenclature, Thermal Conversion Process. TCP is the proposed technology of deriving energy from our society's plentiful waste -- plastics, styrofoam, nylon, animal products, and even -- well, crap. That's right: In the future, Al Bundy will be considered a patriot, doing his share to keep America humming every single time he flushes the john.
Right-wingers are embracing a new film called The Great Global Warming Swindle, which claims that those evil, evil environmentalists have engaged in a massive conspiracy to hoodwink humanity. So far, they've managed to sucker in the world's scientists -- quite a trick.
Although the director of the film, Martin Durkin, engages in the sort of rhetoric we'd expect from a Murdochian dittohead, he claims to be a Marxist. Personally, I am not a Marxist. (Neither was Uncle Karl, by his own admission -- but that's a tale for another time.) I met a few examples of the breed back in college; they were odd and kind of annoying, and I am not anxious to meet more. Here is some interesting background on Durkin:
In 1997 television producer Martin Durkin from the TV company Kugelblitz made a series for Channel 4 called Against Nature, which targeted environmentalists, presenting them as 'the new enemy of science' and as comparable to the Nazis. They were responsible, the series argued, for the deprivation and death of millions in the Third World. (Crimes against Nature , The Revolution Has Been Televised )
Channel Four had to broadcast a prime-time apology after Against Nature drew the wrath of the Independent Television Commission which ruled, 'Comparison of the unedited and edited transcripts confirmed that the editing of the interviews with [the environmentalists who contributed] had indeed distorted or misrepresented their known views. It was also found that the production company had misled them... as to the format, subject matter and purpose of these programs.'
He's your witness, my rightist friends. I wouldn't want him on my side!
Not long ago, when asked whether Hillary Clinton stood a "good chance," Ann Coulter responded:
Good chance of what? Coming out of the closet? I’d say that’s about even money.
Gosh. Is she implying that the Senator (who is married and has a daughter) is a lesbian? Unless Coulter has personal experience to back up this claim, we must presume that she made the comment based purely on the way Hillary looks and carries herself.
All right. Let's play the game by Ann's rules. The following images were the very first ones to pop up when the names Hillary Clinton and Ann Coulter were plugged into a Google Image search. (I did not comb the archives for images that best suited my purposes. These were the first to show up -- although a search conducted at another time may have differing results.)
Let's say that you are a visitor from, oh, say, 1965. You have never seen these two ladies before and you do not know who they are. Which one is more feminine? Which one poses the greater challenge to conventional views of gender?
As Bill Murray once put it: ¿Quien es mas macho?Permalink
I'm still not up for regular posting -- soon, soon -- but for right now, you gotta read this (which comes to us by way of lukery and covert history):
A court in Turkey has ruled to freeze the assets of Yasin al-Qadi , a one-time acquaintance of Vice President Dick Cheney  and reported “chief money launderer” of Osama bin Laden. 
Al-Qadi, prior to being publicly identified as a key al-Qaeda financer, owned a prominent U.S. technology firm and reported CIA front known as Ptech.  He also escorted U.S. officials around during their visits to Saudi Arabia. 
“Council of State Administrative Cases Bureau on Thursday decided to annul a lower court's decision to rescind a cabinet order to freeze the assets of Saudi financier Yasin al-Qadi, who has been accused of financing terrorism,” the Turkish Daily News reported Saturday. 
Similar allegations of obstruction of justice and dereliction of duty have been reported here in the United States, where following the 9/11 attacks FBI agent Robert Wright and other members of his unit claimed that their investigation into Yasin al-Qadi had been repeatedly blocked by higher ups at the FBI. 
As Agent Wright told ABC News in 2002, “the supervisor who was there from [FBI] headquarters was right straight across from me and started yelling at me: 'You will not open criminal investigations. I forbid any of you. You will not open criminal investigations against any of these intelligence subjects.'" 
According to Agent Wright, who seized $1.4 million directly linked to al-Qadi in 1998 , it is very likely that 9/11 would have been prevented if he had simply been allowed to do his job. 
Over the course of Wright’s investigation, however, al-Qadi was apparently assisting the CIA in Albania, Kosovo, Bosnia, and the United States itself. 
Al-Qadi owned a Massachusetts-based technology firm and defense contractor known as Ptech, which, according to U.S. intelligence officials who spoke to 9/11 whistleblower Indira Singh, was a "CIA clandestine op on the level of Iran-Contra." 
At the recent Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), Ann Coulter called John Edwards a "faggot." According to my sources, she formed this impression after she caught him ogling her Adam's apple.
Over on EBay, bidding on her foreskin has topped out at $4.68.
Don't you just love how this "confirmed bachelor" keeps calling married Democrats "faggots"?
Keith Olbermann handed right-wing pundit Ann Coulter his nightly "Worst Person in the World" award for suggesting in her August 2 nationally syndicated column that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) is a closeted lesbian. As Media Matters for America noted, Coulter wrote "I'd say that's about even money" on Sen. Clinton "[c]oming out of the closet" in 2008. Olbermann reminded viewers of Coulter's recent similar remarks, calling former Vice President Al Gore a "total fag" and arguing that her theory that former President Bill Clinton "show[s] some level of latent homosexuality" is "not even surprising," as Media Matters has noted.