Saturday, September 30, 2006
Friday, September 29, 2006
Sellout Of America
Documents Reveal Bush/CFR "Administrative Coup D'etat " of America
Bush 'super-state' agenda to create American Union is now official
Steve Watson, Paul Watson & Alex Jones | September 28 2006
Journalist Jerome Corsi has received the first documents pertaining to a FOIA request asking for full disclosure of the SPP office in its activities towards creating a Pan American Union.
According to a report by World Net Daily , the documents reveal that the Bush administration is running a "shadow government" without congressional oversight in conjunction with Canada and Mexico under the guise of a program "to increase security and to enhance prosperity among the three countries through greater cooperation."
Corsi asserts that a wide range of US administrative law is being re-written in stealth under this program to "integrate" and "harmonize" with administrative law in Mexico and Canada.
The documents contain references to upwards of 13 working groups within an entire organized infrastructure that has drawn from officials within most areas of administrative government including U.S. departments of State, Homeland Security, Commerce, Treasury, Agriculture, Transportation, Energy, Health and Human Services, and the office of the U.S. Trade Representative.
Corsi has further reported that at a recent high-level confab in Banff, an assistant U.S. secretary of state, Thomas A. Shannon , chaired a panel that featured a presentation by Prof. Robert Pastor, author of a book promoting the development of a North American union as a regional government and the adoption of the amero as a common monetary currency to replace the dollar and the peso.
The open plan to merge the US with Mexico and Canada and create a Pan American Union networked by a NAFTA Super Highway has long been a Globalist brainchild but its very real and prescient implementation on behalf of the Council on Foreign Relations has finally been reported on by mainstream news outlets.
After nearly ten years of reporting by Alex Jones and the rest of the Patriot Movement, the establishment press is finally covering serious reports on the plan for a Pan-American Union, based on recent articles by Human Events columnist Jerome Corsi.
Back in June World Net Daily reported ,
"The White House has established working groups, under the North American Free Trade Agreement office in the Department of Commerce, to implement the Security and Prosperity Partnership, or SPP, signed by President Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox and then-Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin in Waco, Texas, March 23, 2005."
The article even carries the admission that the Council on Foreign Relations, often the bane of sophomoric stereotypical caricatures of paranoid conspiracy theorists, played a fundamental role in crafting the policy for the homogenization of the US, Canada and Mexico.
"Many SPP working groups appear to be working toward achieving specific objectives as defined by a May 2005 Council on Foreign Relations task force report, which presented a blueprint for expanding the SPP agreement into a North American union that would merge the U.S., Canada and Mexico into a new governmental form."
This admission is as historical as it is concerning - the CFR moulds the foundational policy for the elimination of American sovereignty and it is passed as executive law within weeks. It is once again evident that the true vestiges of power lie within the ranks of the CFR and the Trilateral Commission who act on policy decided upon by the big brother of multinational semi-secret steering societies, the Bilderberg Group.
Up until five or six years ago the CFR largely operated in the shadows, only publishing its mouthpiece Foreign Affairs, and any inference that the group held sway in US politics or even existed was met by heckles of incredulity from the establishment media. Now the Associated Press openly reports their guiding hand in the drives towards global government.
The framework on which the American Union is being pegged is the NAFTA Super Highway (pictured) , a four football-fields-wide leviathan that stretches from southern Mexico through the US up to Montreal Canada.
Corsi's work cites government websites which carry full planning details of the Super Highway and its construction has already begun in Texas with no congressional oversight whatsoever. The Trans-Texas Corridor is being overseen by The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) and the contract is owned by the Cintra corporation which in turn is owned by the King of Spain Juan Carlos. The project is being financed by the implementation of a toll that will be collected by means of GPS tracking devices installed in all vehicles and also envelops many connecting roads to the highway.
The NAFTA Super Highway will allow vehicles, people and goods to travel from Mexico, into the heart of America and up to Canada with little impediment, effectively erasing America's borders wholesale.
Coupled with Bush's blanket amnesty program, the Pan American Union is the final jigsaw piece for the total dismantling of America as we know it.
Thursday, September 28, 2006
US Satellites in Jepardy ??
Beijing secretly fires lasers to disable US satellites
By Francis Harris in Washington
China has secretly fired powerful laser weapons designed to disable American spy satellites by "blinding" their sensitive surveillance devices, it was reported yesterday.
 |
The hitherto unreported attacks have been kept secret by the Bush administration for fear that it would damage attempts to co-opt China in diplomatic offensives against North Korea and Iran.
Sources told the military affairs publication Defense News that there had been a fierce internal battle within Washington over whether to make the attacks public. In the end, the Pentagon's annual assessment of the growing Chinese military build-up barely mentioned the threat.
"After a contentious debate, the White House directed the Pentagon to limit its concern to one line," Defense News said.
The document said that China could blind American satellites with a ground-based laser firing a beam of light to prevent spy photography as they pass over China.
According to senior American officials: "China not only has the capability, but has exercised it." American satellites like the giant Keyhole craft have come under attack "several times" in recent years.
Although the Chinese tests do not aim to destroy American satellites, the laser attacks could make them useless over Chinese territory.
The American military has been so alarmed by the Chinese activity that it has begun test attacks against its own satellites to determine the severity of the threat.
Satellites are especially vulnerable to attack because they have predetermined orbits, allowing an enemy to know where they will appear.
"The Chinese are very strategically minded and are extremely active in this arena. They really believe all the stuff written in the 1980s about the high frontier," said one senior former Pentagon official.
There has been increasing alarm in parts of the American military establishment over China's growing military ambitions.
Military experts have already noted that Chinese military expenditure is increasingly designed to challenge American military pre-eminence by investing in weaponry that can attack key systems such as aircraft carriers and satellites.
At the same time, China is engaged in a large-scale espionage effort against American high-tech firms working on projects such as the multibillion-pound DD(X) destroyer programme.
Several spy rings have been cracked and the FBI is increasing the number of counter-intelligence staff tracking the Chinese effort.
Wednesday, September 27, 2006
SUPER HIWAY MAP
October 2, 2006
This map is a conceptualization of the Super Highways now underway to connect the United States, Canada, and Mexico to help bring about the creation of a North American Union similar to the European Union.
Map information source: fina-nafi.org (North American Forum on Integration)
The map's travel corridors show the desired routes of the new Super Highways as proposed by the North American Forum on Integration (NAFI) — a group of wealthy industrialists, academics, and politicians whose aim it is to break down barriers to the North American Union. The main actors in NAFI are members of the Council on Foreign Relations or related organizations based in Mexico and Canada.
NAFI, whose first objective is to make "the public and decision-makers aware of the challenges of economic and political integration between the three NAFTA countries," is following the country-integration plan of the European Union. (Emphasis added.) That plan used the idea of "free trade" to make steps toward integration sound appealing to the public. Though the North American Union would devastate the American middle class, the Super Highways are being touted as facilitating free trade and bringing about prosperity in the three countries.
NAFI's vision is being enacted right now. Eighty separate, but interconnected, "high priority corridors" are being initiated in the United States. To find a complete list of the 80 intended Super Highway projects, go to http://www.aaroads.com/high-priority/table.html.
You Have Been Sold Out
THE NEW WORLD DISORDER
Documents disclose
'shadow government'
Indicate U.S. far advanced in constructing
bureaucracy united with Mexico, Canada
Posted: September 26, 2006
1:00 p.m. Eastern
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
 |
The documents, a total of about 1,000 pages, are among the first to be released to Corsi through his FOIA request to the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, or SPP, which describes itself as an initiative "to increase security and to enhance prosperity among the three countries through greater cooperation."
"The documents clearly reveal that SPP, working within the U.S. Department of Commerce, is far advanced in putting together a new regional infrastructure, creating a 'shadow' trilateral bureaucracy with Mexico and Canada that is aggressively rewriting a wide range of U.S. administrative law, all without congressional oversight or public disclosure," Corsi said.
Among the initial discoveries, said Corsi, is the existence of an internal Intranet website that never has been revealed to Congress or the public.
"This private internal website," he claims, "undoubtedly contains a wealth of documentation that the FOIA request has so far intentionally excluded."
Corsi told WND the documents reveal hundreds of internal meetings, memoranda of understanding and other referenced agreements that have not been disclosed.
"We have here the beginnings of a whitewash," he said, "in which SPP evidently thinks the public will be hoodwinked by a 'Myths vs. Facts' document posted for public relations purposes on their public website."
Among the documents is an organizational chart accompanied by a listing of trilateral Mexican, Canadian and U.S. administrative officers who report on multiple cabinet level "working groups."
The government watchdog Judicial Watch announced today it has received some of the same documents, including the organizational chart, which can be seen in this pdf file, on page seven.
"There is no specific authorization for this massive administrative-branch integration with Mexico and Canada other than what amounts to a press conference jointly issued by President Bush, Mexico's President Vicente Fox, and Canada's then-Prime Minister Paul Martin on March 23, 2005, at the end of their summit in Waco, Texas," Corsi said.
Corsi added that even the "Myth vs. Facts" blurb on the SPP.gov website admits the SPP is neither a treaty nor a law.
"The Bush administration is trying to create the infrastructure of a new regional North American government in stealth fashion, under the radar and out of public view," Corsi claims. "Where is Congress, asleep at the wheel?"
The SPP organizational chart Corsi obtained shows 13 working groups covering a wide range of public policy issues, including Manufactured Goods; Energy, Food & Agriculture; Rules of Origin' Health; E-Commerce; Transportation; Environment; Financial Services; Business Facilitation; External Threats to North America; Streamlined & Secured Shared Borders; and Prevention/Response within North America.
U.S. administrative-branch officers participating in these working groups are drawn from the U.S. departments of State, Homeland Security, Commerce, Treasury, Agriculture, Transportation, Energy, Health and Human Services, and the office of the U.S. Trade Representative.
The released documents affirm that counterparts from official governmental agencies in Mexico and Canada are combined with the U.S. administrative branch to form new trilateral "working groups" that actively rewrite U.S. administrative law to "harmonize" or "integrate" with administrative law in Mexico and Canada.
"What we have here amounts to an administrative coup d'etat," Corsi told WND. "Where does the Bush administration get the congressional authorization to invite two foreign nations to the table to rewrite U.S. law?"
If you'd like to sound off on this issue, please take part in the WorldNetDaily poll.
Related offers:
For a comprehensive look at the U.S. government's plan to integrate the U.S., Mexico and Canada into a North American super-state – guided by the powerful but secretive Council on Foreign Relations – read "ALIEN NATION: SECRETS OF THE INVASION," a special edition of WND's acclaimed monthly Whistleblower magazine.
Get Tom Tancredo's new book, "In Mortal Danger," for just $4.95.
Previous stories:
N. American students trained for 'merger'
North American confab 'undermines' democracy
Attendance list North American forum
North American merger topic of secret confab
Feds finally release info on 'superstate'
Senator ditches bill tied to 'superstate'
Congressman presses on 'superstate' plan
Feds stonewalling on 'super state' plan?
Cornyn wants U.S. taxpayers to fund Mexican development
Trans-Texas Corridor paved with campaign contributions?
U.S.-Mexico merger opposition intensifies
More evidence of Mexican trucks coming to U.S.
Docs reveal plan for Mexican trucks in U.S.
Kansas City customs port considered Mexican soil?
Tancredo confronts 'superstate' effort
Bush sneaking North American superstate without oversight?
Related columns:
Coming soon to U.S.: Mexican customs office
Merger with Mexico
Tuesday, September 26, 2006
Air War Against IRAN ???
The March to War: Iran Preparing for US Air Attacks by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya | |
September 21, 2006 | |
Iran is bracing itself for an expected American-led air campaign. The latter is in the advanced stages of military planning. If there were to be war between the United States and Iran, the aerial campaign would unleash fierce combat. It would be fully interactive on multiple fronts. It would be a difficult battle involving active movement in the air from both sides. If war were to occur, the estimates of casualties envisaged by American and British war planners would be high. The expected wave of aerial attacks would resemble the tactics of the Israeli air-war against Lebanon and would follow the same template, but on a larger scale of execution. The U.S. government and the Pentagon had an active role in graphing, both militarily and politically, the template of confrontation in Lebanon. The Israeli siege against Lebanon is in many regards a dress rehearsal for a planned attack on Iran.1 A war against Iran is one that could also include military operations against Syria. Multiple theatres would engulf many of the neighbors of Iran and Syria, including Iraq and Israel/Palestine. It must also be noted that an attack on Iran would be of a scale which would dwarf the events in Afghanistan, Iraq, and the Levant. A full blown war on Iran would not only swallow up and incorporate these other conflicts. It would engulf the entire Middle East and Central Asian region into an extensive confrontation. An American-led air campaign against Iran, if it were to be implemented, would be both similar and contrasting in its outline and intensity when compared to earlier Anglo-American sponsored confrontations. The war would start with intense bombardment and attacks on Iran's infrastructure, but would be different in its scope of operations and intensity. The characteristics of such a conflict would also be unpredictable because of Iran's capabilities to respond. And in all likelihood, Iran would launch its own potent attacks and extend the theatre of war by attacking U.S. and American-led troops in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Persian Gulf. The United States must also take into account the fact that Iran unlike Afghanistan, Iraq, and Lebanon would be an opponent with the capability to resist the US sponsored attacks on the ground, but also on the sea and in the air. Unlike the former opponents faced by the United States and its partners, Iran would be able to target the military launch pads used by the United States. Iran would also be able to attack the U.S. supply and logistical hubs in the Persian Gulf. American ships carrying supplies, troops, and warplanes would be vulnerable to Iranian counter-attacks by way of Iranian missiles, warplanes, and naval forces. It is no mere coincidence that Iran has been demonstrating its military capabilities during the “Blow of Zolfaqar” war games conducted in late August .2 Iranian Preparations for an American-led Air Campaign The United States has continually threatened to attack Iran. These threats are made under the pretext of halting the development of nuclear weapons in Iran. The development of nuclear weapons by Iran is something the IAEA and its inspectors have refuted as untrue3, but the United States insists on continuing the charade as grounds for a military endgame with Iran. The threat of an American-led attack against Iran with the heavy involvement of Israel and Britain, amongst others, has primed Iran to prepare itself for the anticipated moment. Over the years, this has led Iran to stride for self-sufficiency in producing its own advanced military hardware and the development of asymmetrical tactics to combat the United States. Iranian defense planners have stated publicly that they have learned from the cases of neighbouring Afghanistan and Iraq. They are acutely aware of the U.S. military’s heavy reliance on aerial strikes. August 2006 saw the start of the virtually unprecedented events of the Blow of Zolfaqar war games throughout Iran and its border provinces.4 These were similar to those conducted in April 2006. The latter were also held during a period of tense confrontation between Iran and the United States. April 2006 was a period that could have resulted in military conflict between both the United States and Iran. In April 2006, Iran had not only dismissed the deadline set on its nuclear program, but it announced in defiance to the United States that it had successfully enriched uranium for the first time. Iran has taken the opportunity of the launching of both the April 2006 and Blow of Zolfaqar war games to display its preparedness and capability to engage in combat. Additionally, Iran has taken the occasion to fine tune its defenses and mobilize its military apparatus. This exhibition of Iranian military might is intended to deter America's intent to trigger another Middle Eastern war. During the war games, the Iranian military has adjusted and modified its air defense shield for maximum dexterity and efficiency in preparation, to stop incoming missiles and invading aircraft..5 The war games have been an opportunity for testing of Iranian capacity to wage war in the air The Iranian military has also reported the testing of laser-guided weaponry, advanced torpedoes, ballistic missiles, anti-ship missiles, bullets that pierce through bullet-proof vests, and electronic military hardware during the Blow of Zolfaqar war games.6 Surface-to-surface and ocean-to-surface missiles (submarine-to-surface missiles) in the Persian Gulf were also tested in late-August 2006. These included missiles that are invisible to radar and can use multiple warheads or carry multiple payloads to hit numerous targets simultaneously. Iran has also tested a “2,000 pound guided-bomb with long-range capabilities.” This “2,000 pound bomb” is said to be a “special weapon developed for penetrating military, economic and strategic targets located deep underground or on the soil of the [impending] enemy.”7 In the case of war, this weapon could be directed against Anglo-American military infrastructure in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Persian Gulf. This guided bomb is an unmanned aircraft carrying an explosive warhead. Following the execution of the Blow of Zolfaqar war games, the Iranian Defense Minister stated that “Iran now joins the few countries that possess guided missile technology,”8 Iran has also been manufacturing its own warplanes,9 submarines, attack helicopters, tanks, torpedoes, and missiles. This includes remote-controlled modified Maverick Missiles.10 Brigadier-General Amini, the Deputy Commander of the Air Branch (Air Force) of the Regular Forces, has highlighted that Iran has starting the development and manufacturing of new types of warplanes besides the “Lighting fighter jets” that have been showcased in Northern Iran.11 To discourage the United States in its plans to attack Iran, the Iranian military has additionally been showcasing its abilities to dog fight in the air with its fighter jets.12 Iranian fighter and bomber jets have been progressively equipped with advanced software and hardware, developed in Iran or by way of technology transfers from China, the Russian Federation, and the republics of the former Soviet Union. Iranian Commanders have also stated that Iran can track and hit warplanes without using conventional radar. Iran has also been showcasing its signal jamming devices and electronic military hardware, which it compares to NATO standards13. Warnings to the United States To Stop Its War Plans In Iran military commanders and state officials have also directly warned the United States to halt its march towards war in the Middle East. An account of a statement by Major-General Salehi, commander of the Iranian Army, sums up the generic view of Iranian military officials and planners in the advent of another Middle Eastern war initiated by the United States;
The Iranian Defence Minister has said “that his ministry is now equipping the border units of the army with modern military tools and weapons in a bid to increase their military capabilities,”15 and “that any possible enemy invasion of Iran will receive a severe blow, adding that failures of alien troops [meaning U.S., British, Coalition, and NATO forces] in Iraq and Afghanistan have taught trans-regional powers extreme caution.”16 Other examples of public warnings by Iranian military commanders directed at the United States and its partners include;
During the August war games, Iranian military commanders claimed, in a gesture directed towards the United States, Britain, and Israel, “that no air force of any power stationed in the Middle East is capable of confronting the Iranian military’s ground forces.”20 This might seem like a psychological tactic to influence morale on both sides and deter any possible aerial assaults against Iran. This statement cannot be easily overruled if a comprehensive analysis is made and studied. In this regard, one must look at Lebanon, where Hezbollah and the Lebanese Resistance were able to withstand Israeli air raids and overcome the Israeli military on the ground. The Lebanese Resistance is reported as being armed and trained by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. What would an Iranian defensive of a larger magnitude, with state resources and air capabilities, be like? The anticipation of a conflict are also coming from Iraq. Iraqi leaders have been charging that the United States and Britain plan on attacking Iran from Iraqi territory. Government representatives of Anglo-American occupied Iraq have asked that Iraq not be turned into a theatre of war between the United States and Iran. “We do not want Iraq to become an arena where other states [i.e., the United States, Britain, and Iran] settle their accounts,”21 said the Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Barham Salih while visiting the Iranian capital, Tehran. This message looked as if it was mainly directed at the United States, as well as Iran. Iran Always a Military Objective for the United States Washington: “Anyone can go to Baghdad! Real Men go to Tehran!” According to Michel Chossudovsky (The Next Phase of the Middle East War, September, 2006), the war on Iran is another phase of a “military roadmap” which includes the invasions of Afghanistan (2001) and Iraq (2003) and the Anglo-American sponsored Israeli siege of Lebanon (2006) as earlier stages. In May, 2003 after the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq in March 2003, the motto in Washington D.C. was
One should ask why "real" men would continue towards Tehran after the invasion of Iraq. This slogan demonstrates that Iran was an objective or a phase in a broader military operation. With that said, Washington would prefer some form of internal "non-violent" regime change in Iran leading to American control of the Iranian economy and oil resources rather than a high-risk and high cost military confrontation. The shape and nature of this conflict, however, is uncertain. The possibility of conflict with Iran and a major aerial assault are widely known. The United States has been planning to attack Iran for years. Colonel Sam Gardiner (Retired, U.S. Air Force) has stated that the campaign against Iran is one where “the issue is not whether the military option would be used, but who approved the start of operations already.” The March to War with Iran and Syria With time fleeting, the Iranian military is positioning itself in battle formations under the pretext of nationwide war games and other pretexts. Iran has been steadily strengthening its air defenses and air units in preparation for the possibility of strikes. Iranian and Syrian coordination is also intensifying with the passing of time. An attack on Iran and Syria would be a combination of heavy air bombardment by the U.S. Air Force, including the U.S. Army’s air units. It would also include a ground offensive led by the U.S. Marines and Army from the American bases surrounding both Iran and Syria. The U.S. Navy and Coast Guard would predominately manage the theatre of war in the Persian Gulf, with a view to guaranteeing the unimpeded flow of oil through the strategic Straits of Hormuz. The Israeli military would deal with military operations in the Levant. Both Israeli troops and Israeli public opinion are being prepared for the possibility of another Middle Eastern conflict. In this context, Israel would face the possibility of aerial assaults from Iran. Iran has threatened to retaliate if it is attacked, using its ballistic missiles. British and Australian forces in southern Iraq would deploy with the strategic aim of occupying the Iranian province of Khuzestan and securing its oil. Khuzestan is where most of Iran’s oil fields are located. Meanwhile a naval build-up is developing in the Persian Gulf which also includes the U.S. Coast Guard and the Canadian Navy. The United States and its partners meanwhile are continuing to marshal and siphon their forces into the Middle East and Afghanistan. Both the United States and Britain have promised troop reductions in Iraq, but are actually increasing their troop levels. It also seems that a muzzle is being placed on Lebanon to stop any attacks on Israel by the presence of troops from member states of NATO. Syria also seems to be expecting a possible aerial campaign. A vessel sailing to Syria under the flag of Panama, the “Grigorio I,” has been reported to have been stopped off the coast of Cyprus transporting 18 truck-mounted mobile radar systems and three command vehicles for delivery to Syria. This equipment appears to be part of an air defence system.22 In Iran, the Intelligence Minister has warned that “enemies are seeking to create instability in Iran through different measures, including assassinations, explosions and extensive insecurities” and that “his forces, in cooperation and coordination with other governmental bodies, have defused enemies’ plots in different Iranian provinces, including Tehran.”23 Venezuela has also threatened to halt oil exports in the event of an Anglo-American aggression against Iran and Syria. Venezuela has gone on to caution that it will defend Iran “under threat of invasion from the United States.” This was a warning given to the United States by Venezuela during the Conference of the Non-Aligned Movement in Cuba.24 The United States has already started to target both Iran and Syria’s financial bodies and institutions in an act of economic warfare. Syria has in step with Iran taken “preventative steps” in early 2006 by switching from using the U.S. dollar to using the Euro for all its transactions. The head of the state-owned Syria Commercial Bank has said that such measures have been taken to protect Syria from American sanctions (economic warfare).25 Actions have been taken against the large, state-owned Bank Saderat of Iran by the United States.26 The Bank Saderat has been cut off from the U.S. financial system and its network(s). This is part of a deliberate objective to financially cut off Iran from the rest of the world. Three large Japanese banks, the Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Mizuho Corporate Bank and Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation have followed in step and will terminate business with Bank Saderat.27 | |
Email this article to a friend
Print this article
Monday, September 25, 2006
New War In Middle East Starting
Iran and Turkey Prepare for War in Iraqi Kurdistan
DEBKAfile Exclusive Military Report
September 24, 2006, 5:58 PM (GMT+02:00)
 |  |
Turkish tanks in Kurdistan. | |
|
A new Middle East war is in the offing. DEBKAfile’s exclusive military sources in Iraq and sources in Iran reveal that Turkish and Iranian air units as well as armored, paratroop, special operations and artillery forces are poised for an imminent coordinated invasion of the northern Iraqi autonomous province of Kurdistan.
Our sources pinpoint the target of the combined Iranian-Turkish offensive as the Quandil Mountains (see picture), where some 5,000 Kurdish rebels from Turkey and Iran, members of the PKK and PJAK respectively, are holed up. Iranian and Turkish assault troops are already deployed 7-8 km deep inside Iraqi territory.
Turkey to the northwest and Iran to the east both have Kurdish minorities which have been radicalized by the emergence of Iraqi Kurdistan in the last three years. The three contiguous Kurdish regions form a strategic world hub.
A jittery Washington foresees a Kurdish-Iranian military thrust quickly flaring into a comprehensive conflict and igniting flames that would envelop the whole of Iraqi Kurdistan as well as southern Turkey and Armenia.
Tehran is quite capable of using the opening for its expeditionary force to grab extensive parts of Kurdistan and strike a strategic foothold in northern Iraq.
Informed US officials would not be surprised if Turkey took the chance of seizing northern Iraqi oil fields centered on the oil-rich town of Kirkuk, the source of 40 percent of Iraq’s oil output.
When he met US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice in New York Thursday, Sept. 21, Turkish foreign minister Abdullah Gul said: “When we talk about Kirkuk, everybody supposes we want to bring the Kurdish-Turkish issue to the foreground. However, we instead see the uncertainty there as a general issue of Iraq. We are concerned that instability and turmoil in Kirkuk could cause more troubles in Iraq.”
Referring to the recently appointed special US coordinator Gen. Joseph Ralston, Gul expressed his hope that a resolution would be imminent.
The threat was implicit and impatient. Washington was given to infer that Ankara is on the point of deciding whether or not to capture Kirkuk, a step that would undermine a pivotal political and economic base of the Baghdad government and harm US interests in Iraq.
This conversation, which was not nearly as amicable as it looked from the press photos, was clouded by a disturbing incident: A semi-official American military publication recently ran a new map showing parts of Turkish and Armenian territory marked “Kurdistan.”
This map fueled suspicions in Ankara and the Armenian capital Yerevan that the US high military command was in on a plan for Iraqi Kurdish forces led by President Jalal Talabani and Masoud Barzani to help themselves to territory in Turkey and Armenia in a counter-attack to a potential Turkish-Iranian military move in Kurdistan.
This kind of mistrust has lent wings to Ankara’s resolve to go forward against Kurdistan - the sooner the better.
To cool tempers and restrain the Turks, the US ambassador to Turkey, Ross Wilson, stood up in Ankara on Sept 19 and promised: “Northern Iraq won’t serve as a PKK base in the future.” In a speech at a meeting entitled "Agenda 2006," Wilson stated that the map published in an unofficial U.S. military magazine showing parts of Turkish and Armenian territory under the domination of a republic called "Kurdistan" doesn't reflect the official policy of the US.
The ambassador added that the recently stepped-up PKK violent attacks in Turkey “would not be tolerated anymore.”
These words were hardly likely to allay Ankara’s fears, since the ambassador addressed the PKK problem in the future tense, while the Turkish government is troubled by the present.
The approaching conflict, according to DEBKAfile’s military sources, has an Israeli dimension. Since July, Turkish leaders have been impressing on the Bush administration that they have the right to attack Kurdish rebels who mount terrorist attacks in Turkey and take refuge across the border in Iraq’s Quandil Mountains – no less than the Israelis, who with US backing struck back at the Hizballah in Lebanon for its cross-border attacks into northern Israel.
Tehran is not bothering to justify its forthcoming operation in Kurdistan. DEBKAfile’s sources in Tehran report that Iran’s rulers are determined to go in without further ado and crush the Kurdish insurgents carrying out hit-and-run attacks in Iran in recent months.
Vital American and Israeli regional security interests in the Middle East are affected by three additional aspects of the potential anti-Kurdish flare-up.
1. Washington is not convinced by Ankara’s protestations of the absence of Turkish-Iranian military complicity. Turkey and Iran happen to find themselves in the same boat at the same time as targets of terrorists, say the Turks, and both have no choice but to use force to stamp out the violence. But for the Americans, the timing could not be more unfortunate. A possible US (and Israeli) plan to attack Iran’s nuclear installations at this time would be seriously hampered by the closure of Turkish and Kurdish air space to American and Israeli warplanes heading for Iran.
The war plot thickened further this week.
Friday, Sept. 22, while Hizballah’s leader Hassan Nasrallah harangued a million Lebanese spectators in Beirut, Iran’s ambassador to Turkey, Firouz Dolatabadi, spoke in Ankara in ominous tones. He said: “Iran, Turkey and Iraq are key points in the world’s geopolitics. Whoever dominates this region can control the whole world.”
Regarding relations between Iran and Turkey, ambassador Dolatabadi said: “History has it that whenever Iran and the Ottoman Emperor had good relations, we would witness good developments in the region.”
Good for whom? asked worried officials in Washington.
2. An Iranian-Turkish victory in a Kurdish campaign would award Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Corps its second victory in less than two months. The RG officers who commanded Hizballah forces in the Lebanon war of July and August claim full credit for its gains. They thwarted a key objective of the Israeli assault which was to cut Iran’s assets down to size in Lebanon and the western Middle East at large, and have left Iran’s military grip on the region firmer than ever.
3. Israel is concerned lest military action against Turkish PKK rebels uproot its military and economic presence in Iraqi Kurdistan. DEBKAfile’s military sources report that since 2004 Israeli military instructors and intelligence officer have been helping the Kurds build up their peshmerga army and anti-terrorist forces.
Iran and Turkey are convinced that Israel also maintains in north Iraqi Kurdistan observation and early warning posts to forewarn the Jewish state of a coming Iranian attack. If this is so, the two invaders will make a point of destroying such posts. Israel would then forfeit a key intelligence facility against the Islamic Republic.
Regarding Israel’s oft-reported, never officially-admitted, connection with Kurdistan, the BBC’s Newsnight program of Sept 20 claimed to have obtained the first pictures of Kurdish soldiers trained by Israelis in N. Iraq, as well as an interview with an unnamed former trainer.
DEBKAfile’s sources conjecture that the photos were leaked by two sources:
One, Turkish officials concerned to drum up a justifiable “context” for their coming offensive by smearing the Talabani-Barzani leadership as disloyal to Baghdad.
The Kurdish authorities have denied allowing any Israelis into northern Iraq. The purported Israeli trainer told the BBC interviewer that his team was told they would be disowned if discovered.
Two, Turkish or European elements who are anxious to abort an American or Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear industry by exposing Kurdish installations that might serve to expand Israel’s strategic options against Iran. The BBC producers suggested that refueling stops at the Irbil (Hawler) airport in Kurdistan would help the Israel air force overcome the problem of distance to an air strike against Iran.
The British program quoted the trainer as describing the courses given to Kurdish airport security people and army as diverse special operations forces’ anti-terrorism tactics and weapons. DEBKAfile adds that before Abu Musab al Zarqawi was taken out by American forces, his men sought high and low for Israeli instructors to abduct as hostages, but never found them.
The Bush administration recently appointed former NATO commander Gen. Joseph Ralston as special US coordinator in Ankara for the PKK issue in the hope of de-escalating the crisis caused by PKK attacks and delaying Ankara’s war operation against Iraqi Kurdistan. In the second week of September, he held a round of conferences with Turkish political and military leaders. His essential argument was that military action is the last option. But he made little headway. Many Turkish officials found the Ralston initiative too late to hold back the inevitable clash for a number of reasons.
They believe the delay he urged would play into the hands of the Kurdish rebels and give them time to consolidate their preparations to fight off an offensive.
Turkish intelligence reports that Talabani and Barzani are less busy with Iraqi affairs than with transferring large quantities of anti-tank and anti-air rockets to the anti-Turkish PKK and the anti-Iranian PJAK in their hideouts.
Ankara is keen, furthermore, to get in its blow against Kurdistan before an American action against Iran. The Turks buy Russian and Iranian intelligence evaluations according which the US attack may take place at any time between the last week of September and the end of December, 2006. So they feel the ground is burning under their feet.
Iran, for its part, is waiting for Turkey to make the first move in Iraqi Kurdistan. Its troops will go into action only after the first Turkish soldier and tank are on the move.
Saturday, September 23, 2006
ANTI RADIATION TABLETS
NUCLEAR WAR-FEAR
Frustrated by U.S. inaction,
locals prepare for nuke terror
Distribution of anti-radiation tablets
by states, cities planning for worst
Posted: September 23, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
 |
Some officials are claiming federal ineptitude is leaving citizens without the tablets promised in 2002 when Congress passed the Bioterrorism Preparedness Response Act, which set out to provide KI pills to those living within 20 miles of a nuclear reactor to fight off the effects of radioactivity in the event of an accident or attack.
"We know that al-Qaida has long considered nuclear power plants to be a potential target for future attacks, said Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., in a letter to President Bush. "It is now long past time for the final guidelines for potassium iodide stockpiling and distribution to be finished.
Some local governments aren't waiting for Washington to cut through the red tape.
In Massachusetts, for instance, the state legislature passed an amendment calling for the distribution of potassium iodide tablets to all Cape Cod-area towns surrounding the Pilgrim Nuclear Reactor. The first pills are expected to be handed out next month.
In Montgomery County, Pa., officials are distributing KI to schools, businesses and anyone living within a 10-mile radius of the Limerick Generating Station. They are also using the county's website to advise citizens about emergency planning.
The Pennsylvania Department of Health is offering KI tablets at 15 locations for anyone living 10 miles from one of the state's five nuclear power plants.
Every person within 10 miles of Minnesota's two nuclear power plants is receiving vouchers for two free doses of potassium iodide from the state, which received supplies from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
But not everyone is persuaded the distribution of potassium iodide is a good idea.
In Ohio, for instance, the Perry School District is debating whether to restock its aging supplies of KI tablets.
Because of the Proximity of the Perry Nuclear Power Plant, the school district stocked up on potassium iodide five years ago. But the shelf life of the product is five years. That means the pills expire in 2007.
Administrators and school board officials don't want to spend another $1,000 to restock the pills that can prevent thyroid cancer due to exposure from radiation.
While some 20 states already have been involved in the distribution effort to some extent, others flatly refused to participate – even to the point of refusing to accept free potassium iodide from the federal government.
Kansas and Missouri are two such states.
Why?
State officials in Kansas argue that providing the potentially life-saving tablets to residents can give them a false sense of security. Some residents, they say, might dismiss evacuation warnings believing they are immune from harm.
Potassium iodide floods the thyroid to prevent the gland from absorbing radioactive iodine. One 130-milligram tablet a day is considered the proper dose in the event of a radiation threat.
The Ukraine government did not distribute potassium iodide after the world's worst nuclear accident in Chernobyl in 1986. Since then, some 3,000 cases of thyroid cancer, mostly among young people, have been blamed on radiation exposure. Meanwhile, in Poland, downwind from Chernobyl, the government distributed potassium iodide and witnessed no increase in thyroid cancer.
The American Thyroid Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the National Academy of Sciences all endorse keeping preventive doses of potassium iodide around.
Despite efforts to secure nuclear power plants from terrorist attack, the General Accountability Office issued a report in April finding that most plants were not prepared to repel a terrorist attack staged by a dozen or more heavily armed men.
A well-coordinated assault with 50-caliber rifles and rocket-propelled grenade launchers could easily take out security at most nuclear facilities in the U.S., say experts.
"Despite new security provisions – including expanded disaster coordination, more extensive background checks on personnel and stronger criminal penalties for those involved in wrongdoing – I remain concerned that the state of nuclear power plant security is not at the level it should be five years after September 11," said Sen, Chris Dodd, D-Conn.
Friday, September 22, 2006
Israeli Insider - "5767"
By Reuven Koret September 22, 2006
I have some good news and some bad news.
The bad news:
Israel has never in its history had a more disrespected, unpopular, and untrustworthy leadership. Our president is accused of multiple sex crimes. Our prime minister is guilty of incompetence and corruption. Our justice minister is suspended and suspected of french kissing. Our Defense Minister is a national joke.
The war was a fiasco. IDF forces were needlessly jerked around and sacrificed for little or no gain. Our economy has been rocked. Our deterrent profile has been weakened. Our kidnapped soldiers are still in captivity. Jonathan Pollard has been left to rot by successive governments.
Hostile Arabs are climbing fast as a portion of our population. Arab Knesset Members are consorting with the enemy and calling for attacks on the nation that pays their salaries.
The Palestinians have elected a government led by Hamas, which will not recognize Israel and leads the drive to destroy Israel. The "moderate" Abbas is not far behind, faithfully following the PLO "plan of stages" by gently dismembering Israel, piece by piece.
The world has never been less understanding and more hostile to the Jewish State. Jew-hatred is on the rise worldwide. The US welcomes and the UN applauds a Holocaust denier who makes no secret of his nation's desire to wipe Israel off the map. Iran is approaching the capability to fulfill that desire.
Ready for the good news?
Those of us who warned about the danger and stupidity of "disengagement" have been vindicated. The public overwhelmingly believes it was a mistake. The Sharon-Olmert plan for massive retreat is off the agenda, at least for the immediate future. The politicians and commanders who advocated it have been discredited and some may be forced to resign.
There is greater awareness in the nation about the demographic danger posed by disloyal and subversive Arab citizens. There is greater clarity about the genocidal plans of the Palestinians, and the Arab States. There is a growing realization that the Iranian nuclear program must be stopped by all means necessary.
The good news is that we are a more disillusioned nation, and that is a good thing. We have been living with lies, and the liars have been getting away with their falsehoods for too long. The failures of the past year have drawn into sharp relief the successes of our nation, the courage of our soldiers, the fortitude of our citizens.
We have compassionate, selfless philanthropists. We have brilliant entrepreneurs and inventors. We have built world-leading innovations, and world-respected businesses. We have Nobel-winning scientists and philosophers.
We have had waves of new immigrants arriving, as I did more than 22 years ago this month. They come with optimism, and hope, and courage to build a new life in the world's only Jewish homeland. They come with idealism and strength and the will to make Israel into the country it was meant to be, even if it has been twisted and perverted from its destined path.
I have been blessed with the privilege to serve my readers, and to provide a platform for gifted and passionate writers to share their views on our country and its place in the world. I have been given the opportunity to serve my nation and my people, and perhaps to influence in a small way our difficult reality. Personally, I have had an extraordinary and life-changing year.
This year, more than ever, I have the feeling that "the truth is coming out." We are all witnesses to an unfolding revelation, not always pretty, or easy, but awesome in its scope and totality. As the Chinese cures goes, we live in interesting times. But I wouldn't live in any other, nor in any other country.
Thursday, September 21, 2006
We Have Been Sold Out
THE NEW WORLD DISORDER
North American merger
topic of secret confab
Meeting on integration of U.S., Mexico,
Canada brings together top officials
Posted: September 20, 2006
11:55 a.m. Eastern
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
 |
While the conference took place a week ago, only now are documents about participants and agenda items leaking out.
Despite "confirmed" participants including Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, former Secretary of State George Shultz, former Central Intelligence Agency Director R. James Woolsey, former Immigration and Naturalization Services Director Doris Meissner, North American Union guru Robert Pastor, former Defense Secretary William Perry, former Energy Secretary and Defense Secretary James Schlesinger and top officials of both Mexico and Canada, there has been no press coverage of the event. The only media member scheduled to appear at the event, according to documents obtained by WND, was the Wall Street Journal's Mary Anastasia O'Grady.
(Story continues below)
The event was organized by the Canadian Council of Chief Executives and the Canada West Foundation, an Alberta think-tank that promotes closer economic integration with the United States.
The Canadian event is just the latest of a series of meetings, policy papers and directives that have citizens, officials and members of the media wondering whether these efforts represent some sort of coordinated effort to implement a "merger" some have characterized as "NAFTA on steroids."
Nevertheless, opposition is mounting. And it's not just coming from the tinfoil hat brigade.
Perhaps the most blistering criticism came earlier this summer from Lou Dobbs of CNN – a frequent critic of President Bush's immigration policies.
"A regional prosperity and security program?" he asked rhetorically in a recent cablecast. "This is absolute ignorance. And the fact that we are – we reported this, we should point out, when it was signed. But, as we watch this thing progress, these working groups are continuing. They're intensifying. What in the world are these people thinking about? You know, I was asked the other day about whether or not I really thought the American people had the stomach to stand up and stop this nonsense, this direction from a group of elites, an absolute contravention of our law, of our Constitution, every national value. And I hope, I pray that I'm right when I said yes. But this is – I mean, this is beyond belief."
What has Dobbs and a few other vocal critics bugged began in earnest March 31, 2005, when the elected leaders of the U.S., Mexico and Canada agreed to advance the agenda of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America.
No one seems quite certain what that agenda is because of the vagueness of the official declarations. But among the things the leaders of the three countries agreed to work toward were borders that would allow for easier and faster moving of goods and people between the countries.
Coming as the announcement did in the midst of a raging national debate in the U.S. over borders seen as far to open already, more than a few jaws dropped.
Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo. and the chairman of the House Immigration Reform Caucus as well as author of the new book, "In Mortal Danger," may be the only elected official to challenge openly the plans for the new superstate.
Responding to a WorldNetDaily report, Tancredo is demanding the Bush administration fully disclose the activities of the government office implementing the trilateral agreement that has no authorization from Congress.
Tancredo wants to know the membership of the Security and Prosperity Partnership groups along with their various trilateral memoranda of understanding and other agreements reached with counterparts in Mexico and Canada.
Jim Gilchrist, co-founder of the Minutemen, welcomed Tancredo's efforts.
"It's time for the Bush administration to come clean," Gilchrist said. "If President Bush's agenda is to establish a new North American union government to supersede the sovereignty of the United States, then the president has an obligation to tell this to the American people directly. The American public has a right to know."
Geri Word, who heads the SPP office, told WND the work had not been disclosed because, "We did not want to get the contact people of the working groups distracted by calls from the public."
WND can find no specific congressional legislation authorizing the SPP working groups nor any congressional committees taking charge of oversight.
Many SPP working groups appear to be working toward achieving specific objectives as defined by a May 2005 Council on Foreign Relations task force report, which presented a blueprint for expanding the SPP agreement into a North American union that would merge the U.S., Canada and Mexico into a new governmental form.
Phyllis Schlafly, the woman best known for nearly single-handedly leading the opposition that killed the Equal Rights Amendment, sees a sinister and sweeping agenda behind the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America.
"Is the real push behind guest-worker proposals the Bush goal to expand NAFTA into the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, which he signed at Waco, Texas, last year and reaffirmed at Cancun, Mexico, this year?" she asks. "Bush is a globalist at heart and wants to carry out his father's oft-repeated ambition of a 'new world order.'"
She accuses the president and others behind the effort of wanting to obliterate U.S. borders in an effort to increase the Mexican population transfer and lower wages for the benefit of U.S. corporate interests.
"Bush meant what he said, at Waco, Texas, in March 2005, when he announced his plan to convert the United States into a 'Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America' by erasing our borders with Canada and Mexico," she said. "Bush's guest-worker proposal would turn the United States into a boardinghouse for the world's poor, enable employers to import an unlimited number of 'willing workers' at foreign wage levels, and wipe out what's left of the U.S. middle class. Bush lives in a house well protected by a fence and security guards and he associates with rich people who live in gated communities. Yet, for five years, he has refused to protect the property and children of ordinary Arizona citizens from trespassers and criminals."
That's unusually harsh criticism of a Republican president from one of Ronald Reagan's most loyal supporters.
At least one of the nation's daily newspapers has officially weighed in opposition to the mysterious plans for closer cooperation in security, commerce and immigration between the three North American nations.
Recently, the Pittsburgh Tribune Review questioned the unchallenged momentum toward merger.
"Will Americans trade their dead presidents for Ameros?" the newspaper asked in an editorial last month.
The paper chided efforts at replacing the U.S. and Canadian dollars and Mexican peso with "the amero" – a knockoff of the euro – along with the building of "a looming NAFTA-like superstate." Citing the meeting between the three national leaders at Baylor University in Waco, Texas, in March 2005, the editorial warned: "Canadians, Mexicans and Americans who value the sovereignty of their respective countries should be concerned."
The Tribune Review editorial saw synergy between the plans of the national leaders and the ambitious agenda of the Council on Foreign Relations – seen by many as a kind of secretive, shadow government of the elite. The CFR issued a bold report in the spring of 2005, shortly after the joint announcements in Waco by Bush and his counterparts.
"The Council on Foreign Relations published a report in May – "Building a North American Community" – calling for, among other things, redefining the borders of the three nations, creating a super-regional governance board and the North American Paramilitary Group to ensure that Congress does not interfere with whatever the trilateral union feels like doing," said the paper. "Must the Bush administration happily sacrifice every shred of American sovereignty for the greater good of the New World Order?"
In fact, the CFR report is a five-year plan for the "establishment by 2010 of a North American economic and security community" with a common "outer security perimeter."
Some see it as the blueprint for merger of the U.S., Canada and Mexico. It calls for "a common economic space ... for all people in the region, a space in which trade, capital and people flow freely."
The CFR's strategy calls specifically for "a more open border for the movement of goods and people." It calls for laying "the groundwork for the freer flow of people within North America." It calls for efforts to "harmonize visa and asylum regulations." It calls for efforts to "harmonize entry screening."
In "Building a North American Community," the report states that Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin "committed their governments" to this goal March 23, 2005, at that meeting in Waco, Texas.
Alan Burkhart, who describes himself as a free-lance political writer, cross-country trucker "and proud citizen of one of the reddest of the Red States – Mississippi," is another critic seething over these plans that seem to have a life of their own – with little or no real public debate.
"As time passes, American corporations will find it unnecessary to move their facilities out of the country," writes Burkhart. "Our already stagnant wages will be just as low as those of Mexico. The cultures of three great nations will be diluted. Our currency will be replaced with the 'Amero.' And, we'll be one giant step closer to the U.N.'s perverse dream of a one-world government."
The Amero is not a new concept. It was first proposed by the Fraser Institute, a Canadian think tank, in a monograph titled "The Case for the Amero" in 1999.
In June, the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America made one of its most visible and public moves since it was first announced last year. In Washington, June 15, U.S. Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez, Mexican Economy Minister Sergio Garcia de Alba and Canadian Minister of Industry Maxime Bernier joined North American business leaders to launch the North American Competitiveness Council. It was a major development that showed the March 2005 meeting was no fluke – and that the plans announced by the three national leaders then were continuing to take shape. The NACC was first announced by Bush, Harper and Fox.
Made up of 10 high-level business leaders from each country, the NACC will meet annually with senior North American government officials "to provide recommendations and help set priorities for promoting regional competitiveness in the global economy."
Officially, the council has the mandate to advise the governments on improving trade in key sectors such as automobiles, transportation, manufacturing and services. The three countries do more than $800 billion in trilateral trade.
Gutierrez said the Bush administration is determined to develop a "border pass" on schedule despite worries about its implementation. The new land pass is to be in effect for Canadians, Americans and Mexicans by Jan. 1, 2008.
The U.S. executives involved in the NACC include: United Parcel Service Inc. Chairman Michael Eskew; Frederick Smith, chairman of FedEx Corp.; Lou Schorsh, chief executive of Mittal Steel USA; Joseph Gilmour, president of New York Life Insurance Co.; William Clay Ford, chairman of Ford Motor Co.; Rick Wagoner, chairman of General Motors Corp.; Raymond Gilmartin, CEO of Merck & Co. Inc.; David O'Reilly, chief executive of Chevron Corp.; Jeffrey Immelt, chairman of General Electric Co.; Lee Scott, president of Wal-Mart Stores Inc.; Robert Stevens, chairman of Lockheed Martin Corp.; Michael Haverty, chairman of Kansas City Southern; Douglas Conant, president of Campbell's Soup Co. and James Kilt, vice-chairman of Gillette Inc.
The concerns about the direction such powerful men could lead Americans without their knowledge is only heightened when interlocking networks are discovered. For instance, one of the components envisioned for this future "North American Union" is a superhighway running from Mexico, through the U.S. and into Canada. It is being promoted by the North American SuperCorridor Coalition, or NASCO, a non-profit group "dedicated to developing the world’s first international, integrated and secure, multi-modal transportation system along the International Mid-Continent Trade and Transportation Corridor to improve both the trade competitiveness and quality of life in North America."
The president of NASCO is George Blackwood, who earlier launched the North American International Trade Corridor Partnership. In fact, NAITCP later morphed into NASCO. A NAIPC summit meeting in 2004, attended by senior Mexican government officials, heard from Robert Pastor, an American University professor who wrote "Toward a North American Community," a book promoting the development of a North American union as a regional government and the adoption of the amero as a common monetary currency to replace the dollar and the peso.
Pastor also was vice chairman of the May 2005 Council on Foreign Relations task force entitled "Building a North American Community" that presents itself as a blueprint for using bureaucratic action within the executive branches of Mexico, the U.S. and Canada to transform the current trilateral Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America into a North American union regional government. He was also prominent on the guest list in Banff.