The Purple Pinup Guru Platform

When purple things are pulsating on your mind, I'm the one whose clock you want to clean. Aiding is Sparky, the Astral Plane Zen Pup Dog from his mountain stronghold on the Northernmost Island of the Happy Ninja Island chain, this blog will also act as a journal to my wacky antics at an entertainment company and the progress of my self published comic book, The Deposit Man which only appears when I damn well feel like it. Real Soon Now.

Saturday, April 22, 2006

SPARKY: Cheney's goon plays to party line

I'm not camping the Huffington Post but this should get more coverage ... It's a shame how much Bush Juntas I & II continues to take up the ass from the damn Saudis -when we think of their nationals who flew hijacked planes into buildings for the September 11, 2001 attacks.
The image “” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.

The Executive's Henchmen Ride Again

Central Intelligence Agency Director Porter Goss - who in all of my conversations with intelligence officers has only ever been described as a criminal and "Sycophantic Cheney's boy," fired a whistleblower last night for exposing the inhumanity and extreme cruelty of this administration. -
“... The CIA did not reveal the identity of the employee, who was dismissed Thursday, but NBC News reported last night she is Mary McCarthy. An intelligence source confirmed that the report was accurate.

McCarthy began her career in government as an analyst at the CIA in 1984, public documents show. She served as special assistant to the president and senior director for intelligence programs at the White House during the Clinton administration and the first few months of the Bush administration. She later returned to the CIA. Attempts to reach her last night were unsuccessful.

The CIA's statement did not name the reporters it believes were involved, but several intelligence officials said The Post's Dana Priest was among them. This week, Priest won the Pulitzer Prize for beat reporting for articles about the agency, including one that revealed the existence of secret, CIA-run prisons in Eastern Europe and elsewhere. ...”

The image “” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.
Cheney's Boy Porter
The concept of "national security" is not remotely of interest to Goss, Cheney, Bush or any other member of this corrupt and twisted administration. In order to fully care about national security, one would be required to care first. And this administration has proved over and over that it has no care for the citizens of this nation, the soldiers serving this nation, the intelligence officers working to protect this nation, the laws of this nation, the Congress of this nation, the Judiciary of this nation, and in general for anything outside of its own wretched power lust and greed frenzy.

Consider that this career officer may have at one time or another been covert, although not currently. The CIA never publicly fires employees, covert or otherwise, for this very reason. Moreover, everyone I have spoken with says this is the first case they know of where an officer was fired for leaking to the press. So why is Goss so eager to publicly expose this career officer who had recently served in the inspector general's office as well as on the National Security Council?

And why did he time it to coincide with revelations that Secretary Condoleezza Rice passed classified information to the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) in the same manner as the now imprisoned Larry Franklin?
“ ... Prosecutors disputed the allegation that Rice had improperly leaked information, and opposed the subpoenas. Rice "never gave national defense information" to Rosen, Assistant U.S. Atty. Kevin DiGregory told Ellis.

Rosen and former AIPAC employee Keith Weissman are charged with collaborating with former Pentagon analyst Lawrence A. Franklin to collect secret defense information about the Middle East.

Franklin was sentenced Jan. 20 to more than 12 years in prison for giving classified information to Rosen, Weissman and an Israeli diplomat.

Ellis also approved a defense subpoena for Franklin.

The indictment alleges a conspiracy dating to 1999, including meetings with two other government officials at which secret information was disclosed. Those officials are not charged in the case. Though they are not identified in the indictment, one of them is reported to be Satterfield.

According to prosecutors, Rosen and Weissman assiduously acquired information about a range of secrets, including a sensitive analysis of U.S. policy in Iran. AIPAC fired them last year, saying they acted contrary to the best interests of the organization. ... ”
Because Porter Goss had only one job at the CIA and it had nothing to do with fighting the war on terror or protecting national security. He was appointed to clean house of anyone with a conscience, to bury the bodies and silence the witnesses.

Worse still, consider the information that this whistleblower leaked and what the implications of such a public display of political dirty tricks and intimidation will mean for this nation.

Larry Franklin

Lawrence Franklin
Lawrence Anthony Franklin is a U.S. Air Force Reserve colonel who has pled guilty to passing information about U.S. policy towards Iran to Israel through the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the foremost pro-Israel lobbying organization in the U.S, while he was working for the Defense Department. Two former employees of that organization are also facing charges that they assisted him in the AIPAC espionage scandal and passing classified information to an Israeli diplomat Naor Gilon. On January 20, 2006, Judge T.S. Ellis, III sentenced Franklin to 151 months (almost 13 years) in prison and fined him $10,000. [1] The case was heard in United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia where a number of "Al-Qaeda" defendants have been given sentences much harsher than Franklin's.

Franklin at the Office of Special Plans

In 2002 and 2003, Franklin worked at the Office of Special Plans which was set up by Donald Rumsfeld. The office was led by prominent neocon Douglas Feith, who sent Larry Franklin overseas repeatedly for sensitive projects involving foreign citizen contacts. [2] Under Feith's authorization,[3] Larry Franklin met with Iran-Contra figures [4] who were shopping [5] Iraq WMD intelligence to an eager audience. [6] This unvetted WMD information was then "stove-piped" to the White House for use in building support for the war. [7] The WMD information gleaned from these "back-channel" meetings turned out to be false. Post invasion, the Iraq Survey Group found Iraq had no stocks of WMD, nor the capability to produce them.

See also

External links

  • Centre for Counterintelligence and Security Studies: Larry Franklin Case [9]
  • FranklinGate [10]
  • Pentagon analyst guilty in Israeli spy scandal [11]
  • Pentagon Analyst Pleads Guilty in AIPAC-Israeli Spy Case [12]
  • Larry Franklin indicted for espionage [13]
  • Toeing an Illegal Line [14]
  • "USG0-1" in AIPAC espionage case is former CIA analyst Kenneth Pollack [15]
  • Dailykos files on Larry Franklin [16]
  • Executive Intelligence Review: Larry Franklin Case [17]
  • Bigger Than AIPAC [18]
  • SourceWatch: Larry Franklin [19]
  • Larry Franklin, flipped [20]
  • Mole Hunt [21]
  • Franklin Affair Blows Neo-con Moles at DoD [22]
  • Israeli Spying On U.S. Unravels, Franklin Sings Like Canary [23]
  • AIPAC Spy Ring Indictment [24]
  • Keith Weissman, an Iran analyst at the AIPAC [25]
  • Keith Weissman at an Iranian event [26]
  • Steven Rosen Indictment [27]
  • Notes on Naor Gilon [28]
  • Notes on Harold Rhode [29]
  • Iran-Contra II: Fresh scrutiny on a rogue Pentagon operation [30]
  • Center for Cooperative Research, Profile: Larry Franklin [31]
  • Israeli Spying archives [32]
  • Still Dreaming of Tehran [33]
  • Jail the War Party for treason [34]
  • Justin Raimondo. Larry Franklin's October Surprise,, October 8, 2004.
  • Warren P. Strobel. Pentagon analyst charged with passing secrets to Israeli lobby, Knight Ridder, May 5, 2005.
  • Jerry Markon. Pentagon spy for Israel given 12 years, Washington Post, January 21, 2006.
  • USAF Lieutenant Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski (retired): When I was there (Pentagon) in 2002-2003, Larry Franklin was the Iran desk officer with the Defense Under Secretary for Policy, Near East South Asia, moving later to the Office of Special Plans. [35]

American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)

The image “” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.
U.S. President George W. Bush addresses AIPAC
members in Washington on May 18, 2004. To his
right is AIPAC's executive director Howard Kohr
and to his left is AIPAC president Bernice

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is a special interest group that lobbies the United States Government on behalf of a strong U.S. - Israel relationship. Describing itself as "America's Pro-Israel Lobby," it is a mass-membership organization including both Jews and non-Jews, and is considered one of the most powerful political lobbies in the United States.


Founded in 1953 by I.L. "Si" Kenen, AIPAC's original name was the American Zionist Committee for Public Affairs. According to UCLA political science professor and author, Steven Siegel, "the tension between the Eisenhower administration and Israeli supporters was so acute that there were rumors (unfounded as it turned out) that the administration would investigate the American Zionist Council. Therefore, an independent lobbying committee was formed, which years later was renamed [AIPAC]." [SPIEGEL, p. 52]. Today, AIPAC has 65,000 members across 50 states.

Activities and stated goals

AIPAC's stated purpose is to lobby the Congress of the United States on issues and legislation that are in the best interests of Israel and the United States. It regularly meets with members of Congress and holds events where it can share its views. It also provides analysis of the voting records of U.S. federal representatives and senators with regard to how they voted on legislation related to Israel. AIPAC has been effective in gaining support for Israel among members of Congress and White House administrations.

The New York Times described AIPAC on July 6, 1987 as "a major force in shaping United States policy in the Middle East." The article also stated that: "The organization has gained power to influence a presidential candidate's choice of staff, to block practically any arms sale to an Arab country, and to serve as a catalyst for intimate military relations between The Pentagon and the Israeli army. Its leading officials are consulted by State Department and White House policy makers, by senators and generals."

AIPAC's views of its strengths and achievements

AIPAC claims its strengths lie in its national membership base and great research capacity to understand both Israel's interest and the interests of other countries affecting US-Israel relationship around the world. Some of the achievements it claims [1] include:

  • Isolating Hamas, Hezbollah, and Palestinian Islamic Jihad by advocating that the Administration place the terrorist groups on a more restrictive terrorist list, allowing the United States to sanction foreign financial institutions if they fail to block the organizations’ assets.
  • Disrupting Hamas financing by urging the Administration to freeze the assets of the U.S.-based Holy Land Foundation, which has been accused of funneling money to the terrorist organization.
  • Defending Israel from terrorist bomb attacks by securing $28 million for Israel to purchase American technology, including robots and scanners, designed to detect and neutralize bombs.


AIPAC advises members of Congress about the issues that face today's Middle East, including the dangers of extremism and terrorism. It was an early supporter of the Counter-Terrorism Act of 1995, which resulted in increased FBI resources being committed to fight terrorism, as well as expanded federal jurisdiction in prosecuting criminal activities related to terrorism.

AIPAC also supported the funding of a number of Israeli military projects that have resulted in many new additions to the arsenal of America's Armed Services. The Arrow anti-missile system is now the most advanced working anti-ballistic missile system in the world.

Martin Indyk research director at the AIPAC, founded the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) think-tank in 1985.

AIPAC lobbies for financial aid from the United States to Israel, helping to procure nearly $3 billion in aid. [1]


AIPAC has been connected to several controversial events.

In 1982, AIPAC was able to convince the US Congress and President Reagan to veto a French-supported UN resolution condemning the Israeli Invasion of Lebanon, which called for the immediate withdrawal of Israeli soldiers from Lebanon to allow for the safe evacuation of Palestinians. This caused some critics in the media to argue that the "Reagan administration could not commit itself to concrete action to stop the killing in Lebanon". [2] The United States defended its vote stating that the proposed resolution would allow the PLO to retain its weapons during the evacuation, thus allowing it to potentially carry out attacks throughout the evacuation.

In 1992, AIPAC president David Steiner had to resign when he was tape recorded boasting about his political influence, saying he had "cut a deal" with the Bush administration to give more aid to Israel. He had arranged for "almost a billion dollars in other goodies," he added and was "negotiating" with the incoming Clinton administration over appointing a pro-Israeli Secretary of State. Steiner also stated AIPAC had "a dozen people in (the Clinton) headquarters. And they are all going to get big jobs."

Haim Katz told the Washington Times that he taped the conversation because "as someone Jewish, I am concerned when a small group has a disproportionate power. I think that hurts everyone, including Jews. If David Steiner wants to talk about the incredible, disproportionate clout AIPAC has, the public should know about it."[3]

Franklin, Rosen, Weissman

  • In August 2004, it was revealed that the FBI had been conducting an investigation of Larry Franklin, a United States Department of Defense employee, on suspicion of espionage.
  • In May 2005, the Justice Department announced that Franklin had been arrested and charged with providing classified information about potential attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq. The one-count criminal complaint did not identify AIPAC by name, but described a luncheon meeting in which, allegedly, Franklin disclosed top-secret information to two AIPAC officials.
  • In August 2005, former AIPAC policy director Steven Rosen and AIPAC senior Iran analyst Keith Weissman were indicted for illegally conspiring to gather and disclose classified national security information to Israel.
  • On January 20, 2006, Judge T. S. Ellis III sentenced Franklin to 151 months (almost 13 years) in prison and fined him $10,000.
For full details, see AIPAC espionage scandal


AIPAC has a wide base of supporters both in and outside of Congress. Support among congressional members includes a majority of members of both the Democratic and Republican Parties. One supporter, state Rep. Mark B. Cohen of Philadelphia (a delegate to the 2004 AIPAC national convention in Washington, D.C.) said: "AIPAC plays valuable roles in expanding the pro-Israel communities in the United States, and in putting them in touch with those who influence the direction of American foreign policy. AIPAC is a diverse, broad-based organization which seeks to synthesize the views of its backers with objective information to pursue the advocacy of policies that benefit both the United States and Israel. No organization can better articulate the American interests in a strong U.S.-Israel military alliance than AIPAC can."

President George W. Bush, addressing AIPAC members in Washington on May 18, 2004, stated: "AIPAC is doing important work. In Washington and beyond, AIPAC is calling attention to the great security challenges of our time. You've always understood and warned against the evil ambition of terrorism and their networks. In a dangerous new century, your work is more vital than ever."


AIPAC also has critics, including United States Representative Cynthia McKinney and journalist Alexander Cockburn of CounterPunch, who claim that AIPAC was instrumental in helping to defeat Congressional candidates that AIPAC deemed unfriendly to Israel, Representative McKinney of Georgia (after her first term as a Representative) and former Representative Earl F. Hilliard of Alabama.[2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]

Other critics, such as Representative Dave Obey, of Wisconsin, contend that AIPAC primarily reflects the right-wing Likud's positions, rather than representing those of more left-wing Israeli political parties, such as the Labor Party.[8] [3] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] For critics, the relationship between AIPAC and the Israeli government raises other concerns. AIPAC is not registered under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) [14], which requires those who receive funds or act on behalf of a foreign government to register. While AIPAC maintains that it receives no funds or directions from the State of Israel, past critics, such as former American Senator William Fulbright and former senior CIA official Victor Marchetti, contended that AIPAC should have registered. The recent AIPAC espionage scandal has increased attention to FARA's possible applicability to AIPAC. [15]

Hedrick Smith claimed in his book The Power Game: How Washington Works that AIPAC had become a superlobby: "[It] gained so much political muscle that by 1985 AIPAC and its allies could force President Reagan to renege on an arms deal he had promised to [Jordan's] King Hussein. By 1986, the pro-Israel lobby could stop Reagan from making another jet fighter deal with Saudi Arabia, and Secretary of State George Shultz had to sit down with AIPAC's executive director -- not Congressional leaders -- to find out what level of arms sales to the Saudis AIPAC would tolerate".

Mearsheimer & Walt paper

Main article: The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy

John Mearsheimer, political science professor at the University of Chicago, and Stephen Walt, Academic Dean of the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, published a working paper, The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, in March, 2006 claiming that U.S. Middle East policy is not in America's national interest and is motivated primarily by AIPAC. This paper has garnered much criticism, and Harvard asked to have its name removed from it.


  1. ? AIPAC. AIPAC: Who we are. AIPAC. Accessed March 28, 2006.
  2. ? Cockburn, Alexander. From Cynthia McKinney to Katha Pollitt, to the ILWU to Paul Krugman, CounterPunch, August 21, 2002. Accessed March 26, 2006.
  3. ? a b Muwakkil, Salim. The warp factor of the Israeli lobby, Chicago Tribune, July 1, 2002. Accessed on, March 26, 2006.
  4. ? Nigut, Bill. Deconstructing Cynthia McKinney, Atlanta Jewish Times, November 5, 1999. Accessed March 26, 2006.
  5. ? McKinney. Cynthia Ann McKinney: The Voice of the Voiceless, Campaign Web Site. Accessed March 26, 2006.
  6. ? Hughes, William. McKinney's Defeat: Undue Meddling, CounterPunch, September 5, 2002. Accessed March 26, 2006.
  7. ? Madsen, Wayne. Crushing Congressional Dissent: The Fall of Hilliard, Barr and McKinney, CounterPunch, August 22, 2002. Accessed March 26, 2006.
  8. ? Edsall, Thomas B. and Moore, Molly. Pro-Israel Lobby Has Strong Voice. The Washington Post, September 5, 2004. Accessed March 26, 2006.
  9. ? Zogby, James. Is AIPAC in Trouble? Part IV: The Problems Within the Lobby and the Jewish Community, Arab American Institute, August 30, 1993. Accessed March 27, 2006.
  10. ? Ticker, Bruce. AIPAC Charges Offer Opportunity, Philadelphia Jewish Voice, September 2005. Accessed March 27, 2006.
  11. ? Rozen, Laura and Vest, Jason. Cloak and Swagger, The American Prospect, November 2, 2004. Accessed March 27, 2006.
  12. ? Nir, Ori. Questions raised over AIPAC's tactics, The Forward, September 3, 2004. Accessed March 27, 2006.
  13. ? Dorf, Matthew. After Barak win, AIPAC reverses opposition to a Palestinian state, The Jewish News Weekly of Northern California, May 28, 1999. Accessed March 27, 2006.
  14. ? Foreign Agents Registration Unit (FARA) Counterespionage Section, Department of Justice, Criminal Division. Accessed March 28, 2006.
  15. ? Nir, Ori. Leaders Fear Probe Will Force Pro-Israel Lobby To File as ‘Foreign Agent' Could Fuel Dual Loyalty Talk. The Forward. December 21, 2004. Accessed March 28, 2006.

See also

External links

Critical or questioning

Disclaimer: Sparky's Mom is an AIPAC lobbyist.
And the Anderson papers nonsence the FBI is going on about shows that the Government is not done hunting out dangerous Jews ...

Too many people on stupid pills out there - Sparks

Friday, April 21, 2006

Sparky: Pardon my mood

Wikipedia's List of Japanese female porn stars

Kyoko Ayana

The image “” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.
Birthdate: April 15, 1981
Birth location: Kanagawa, Japan
Measurements: 37"F-23"-35"
Height: 5' 1" (154 cm)
Natural bust: Yes

Kyoko Ayana
(Kanji: ????, Hiragana: ???????? Ayana Ky?ko - born April 15, 1981 in the Kanagawa Prefecture, Japan) is a Japanese AV Idol, working for Moodyz and other companies since 2001. Moodyz is one of Japan's largest adult film producers, featuring a popular catalog of VHS and DVD titles. Makers of the Dream Woman Bukkake series. She primarily works as an "indies" actress, and does not work with companies associated with Sof-Rin (the Japanese Software Morality Association).

External links

Shoko Goto

The image “” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.
Birthdate: January 18, 1985
Birth location: Kyushu, Miyazaki Prefecture, Japan
Birth name: Shoko Goto, ????
Measurements: 110-60-90cm
Height: 157cm
Eye color: Brown
Hair color: Black
Natural bust: Yes
Blood Group: A
Orientation: Heterosexual
Ethnicity: Japanese

Shoko Goto (???? Gotou Shouko) is a busty Japanese adult film actress. She wears a 110 cm J-cup bra and was born in Miyazaki Prefecture in Japan's southernmost island of Kyushu. Shoko debuted on the Japanese adult entertainment scene with her photo shoot in the September 2004 issue of Bachelor Magazine.


  • 19 Heavy Years Old
  • Big Breast Evolution
  • Menu (Female Breast)
  • Big Bust Tutor
  • A Class Breast Attack
  • Maid Servant
  • Hentai Aspiration
  • Fetish World with Marina Matsushima
  • Go Go Harenchi Girl


  • Shoko's sign is the Capricorn.
  • Her favorite food is grapefruit.

External link

That's better ... - Sparks

Wednesday, April 19, 2006

Sparky: Words from the man who really won in 2000 about the cheater who stole the election

Dear Sparky,

Bush's Last 1000 Days!

The DCCC has set a goal to raise $150,000 by April 26th -- which will mark exactly 1000 days from George W. Bush's last day in office. We simply cannot afford to wait 1000 days to put the brakes on Bush's agenda. We need a Democratic Majority. Help us raise $150,000 -- that's $10,000 for every seat we need to win back the majority.

In all my years of public service I have never witnessed national political leaders as corrupt, incompetent and subservient to powerful special interests as George Bush and the Republican Rubber Stamp Congress.

The level of cynicism and crass political calculation that characterizes the Bush White House and the Republican-controlled Congress is truly breathtaking.

Critical public policy issues -- from national security and global warming to public health and retirement security -- seem to be formulated solely on the basis of what will please the special interests most important to maintaining the Republican Party's stranglehold on the federal government. The needs of the American people be damned.

And this reprehensible behavior is aided and abetted by the complete and utter lack of oversight of the Bush administration by the Republican Rubber Stamp Congress.

Seven days from today, April 26th, will mark exactly 1000 days from George W. Bush's last day in office. I am here to tell you that we simply cannot afford to wait 1000 days to put the brakes on Bush's agenda.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) is leading the fight to restore a Democratic majority to the U.S. House of Representatives and your support is critical to their effort. They have set a goal to raise $150,000 by April 26th -- $10,000 for every seat we need to win back the majority. Can you help?

Stop the Bush agenda cold and restore accountability to our government by rushing a generous gift of $25, $35 or even $50 to the DCCC right now.

Public opinion polls make clear that significant majorities of the American people have had enough of reckless, corrupt and incompetent Republican rule. The political landscape is shifting in favor of the Democratic Party and we may have our best chance in 10 years of electing a Democratic majority to the U.S. House of Representatives.

Working to restore our Democratic majority is the full time job of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. In fact, the sole mission of the DCCC is to work night and day to elect Democrats to Congress. Their historic national grassroots campaign plan provides a detailed road map of how they will wage a 50 state campaign for victory this November.

But, as someone who has spent most of their adult life in public service, I can tell you that the DCCC cannot succeed with out the active engagement and generous support of committed Democrats like you.

By April 26th, the DCCC needs to raise $150,000 to help our Democratic challengers kick their campaigns into high gear. We must also help Democratic incumbents, who are already under an intensifying assault by Karl Rove, fight back against what is certain to be the nastiest campaign in living memory.

So please, rush a generous gift of $25, $35 or even $50 to the DCCC right now. Give the DCCC the financial resource it needs to implement its national campaign plan and win the 15 seats we need to restore the Democratic majority.

So much is at stake in this November's election. So many critically important public policies are being driven right now by a small cabal of Bush cronies who are free from even the pretense of oversight by their enablers in the Rubber Stamp Congress. This must come to an end.

The fact of the matter is the Republican Congress is incapable of fulfilling its constitutional responsibilities of checking the breathtaking excesses of the Bush administration. And, change must come now. America cannot take three more years of one-party rule in Washington D.C. Fortunately, we don't have to. George W. Bush and Dick Cheney may not be on the ballot this November, but the Rubber Stamp Congress is.

And, we can hold Republicans accountable for the horrible mess they have made of our country and halt the GOP's attack on our fundamental freedoms ... reduce our nation's dependence on foreign oil ... restore stem cell research ... and tackle global warming, a planetary emergency that we must address immediately.

But, the Democratic candidates running this November need your help to carry the fight to the Republicans and win. Please rush a generous gift today and support the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee's campaign to take back our government. Together, we can make sure that George W. Bush's last 1000 days in office are not easy ones.

Please rush a generous gift of $25, $35 or even $50 to the DCCC right now. Give the DCCC the financial resource it needs to implement its national campaign plan and win the 15 seats we need to restore the Democratic majority.


Al Gore

PS: Help put an end to the Bush agenda and the corrupt practices of the Republican Party by rushing a generous gift to the DCCC today. Together, we can restore the faith and confidence of the American people in their leaders and make our government truly of, by and for the people. Contribute $25, $35 or even $50 to the DCCC right now.

Forward our message to your friends and family.

Interested in electing more Democrats to the House? Contribute to the DCCC today.

To unsubscribe from this email list, please click here.

New York Times:Scott Shane: F.B.I. Is Seeking to Search Papers of Dead Reporter

“ ... Mr. Anderson's son Kevin said that to allow government agents to rifle through the papers would betray his father's principles and intimidate other journalists, and that family members were willing to go to jail to protect the collection.

"It's my father's legacy," said Kevin N. Anderson, a Salt Lake City lawyer and one of the columnist's nine children. "The government has always and continues to this day to abuse the secrecy stamp. My father's view was that the public is the employer of these government employees and has the right to know what they're up to."

The F.B.I. says the dispute over the papers, which await cataloging at George Washington University here, is a simple matter of law.

"It's been determined that among the papers there are a number of classified U.S. government documents," said Bill Carter, an F.B.I. spokesman. "Under the law, no private person may possess classified documents that were illegally provided to them. These documents remain the property of the government."

The standoff, which appears to have begun with an F.B.I. effort to find evidence for the criminal case against two pro-Israel lobbyists, has quickly hardened into a new test of the Bush administration's protection of government secrets and journalists' ability to report on them. ...”

Sparky doesn't find it amusing that with Arabs apparently off limits, the FBI wants to go after Jews. And his mom is an AIPAC lobbyist.

US allegedly committed acts of violence in Iran using ex-members of MEK during past year

On Thursday, the Internet news publication Raw Story corroborated claims that the U.S. is involved in acts of violence committed in Iran. It claims that these are being carried out by retrained ex-members of the People's Mujahedin of Iran (MEK) rather than by traditional US soldiers.

A previous claim was made by former United Nations weapons inspector Scott Ritter in June 2005 that United States security forces have been sending members of the MEK into Iranian territory. Ritter claimed that the CIA had used the MEK "to carry out remote bombings in Iran of the sort that the Bush administration condemns on a daily basis inside Iraq".

Early this month, Seymour Hersh made a similar statement in New Yorker Magazine about the entry of US troops themselves into Iranian territory, but without supporting the claim that they carried out acts of violence. Hersh claimed that US combat troops are "now operating in Iran" and that according to a "government consultant with close ties to civilians in the Pentagon, the [combat troop] units were also working with minority groups in Iran, including the Azeris, in the north, the Baluchis, in the southeast, and the Kurds, in the northeast [sic]." According to Hersh, the government consultant also said that the US troops "are studying the terrain, and giving away walking-around money to ethnic tribes, and recruiting scouts from local tribes and shepherds."

In Thursday's report, Raw Story supported the previous claims about the US committing acts of violence in Iran, with the difference that it claimed that the acts are being carried out by proxy retrained ex-MEK members rather than by traditional US soldiers, and that the incursions have been occurring for about a year.

Raw Story cited an unnamed United Nations source "close to" the UN Security Council who stated that former MEK members have been used as a proxy by the US for "roughly a year" inside of Iranian territory. An intelligence source quoted by Raw Story said that the former MEK members were made to "swear an oath to Democracy and resign from the MEK" before being incorporated into US military units and retrained for their operations in Iran. The MEK is an Iranian opposition group listed by the U.S. State Department as a Foreign Terrorist Organization but describes itself as "secular" and "patriotic, Muslim and democratic".

Raw Story cited the UN official saying that "We are already at war". Retired U.S. Air Force Colonel Sam Gardiner made similar remarks on CNN on Friday saying "I would say -- and this may shock some -- I think the decision has been made and military operations are under way."

Raw Story said that the MEK has been used in the Iranian provinces of Baluchistan and Khuzestan and quoted a senior British intelligence official saying that British intelligence believes that the MEK is responsible for the violent attacks in the southern Iran, and that people from a "US Special mission unit" are present on Iranian territory, but was unsure as to the links between US military and the MEK.

According to the National Council of Resistance of Iran, which is alleged by the FBI to be "an integral part of the MEK", Professor Raymond Tanter of Georgetown University and a former White House aide argued on Al-Jazeera television that the only way to confront Iran's threats is to support the MEK and its removal from the U.S. State Department list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations and from its classification as a terrorist organization by the Council of the European Union.

Raw Story reports that the office of the Undersecretary of Defense Intelligence did not return calls for comment.

Related Stories


Ponder the above - Sparky

Monday, April 17, 2006

Sparky: Easter done? Here's some fun!

The God Who Wasn't There

Directed by Brian Flemming
Produced by Brian Flemming
Amanda Jackson
Written by Brian Flemming
Starring Richard Dawkins
Sam Harris
Richard Carrier
Alan Dundes
Earl Doherty
Robert M. Price
Distributed by Beyond Belief Media
Released May 21, 2005
Running time 62 mins
Language English
IMDb profile

The God Who Wasn't There is an independent documentary that explores and questions the historicity of Jesus Christ. It is written and directed by Brian Flemming, and was released theatrically on May 21, 2005, and on DVD on June 6, 2005.


According to the film's official website, the aim of the documentary is to hold "modern Christianity up to a merciless spotlight." The God Who Wasn't There, the website goes on to claim, is "bold and hilarious... [and] asks the questions few dare to ask. And when it finds out how crazy the answers are, it dares to call them crazy." Flemming is identified as an ex-fundamentalist Christian, and he is now portrayed as a "guide through the bizarre world of Christianity." [1] The film has inspired a great deal of controversy.

The film asks questions which explore the roots of Christian belief. The documentary in particular proposes that Jesus was a fictional character who was never based on a real human, that Christian doctrine often contradicts itself, and encourages immorality when it serves the religion, and that moderate Christianity makes even less sense than the extremist form.

The film notes:

  • The early founders of Christianity seem wholly unaware of the idea of a human Jesus.
  • The Jesus of the Gospels bears a striking resemblance to other ancient heroes and the figureheads of pagan savior cults.
  • Contemporary Christians are largely ignorant of the origins of their religion.
  • Fundamentalism is as strong today as it ever has been, with an alarming 44% of Americans believing Jesus will return to earth in their lifetimes.
  • And God simply isn't there.


Several notable personalities make appearances in the documentary.


The film has come under scrutiny for a number of its claims. Central among them is the film's thesis that Jesus was a fictional character. This claim is considered by many contemporary New Testamenthistorians to be a radical position. Essentially, the viewpoints of the scholars interviewed in this documentary (Price, Doherty) represent the correct viewpoint in the field of New Testament scholarship. Some mainstream secular scholars believe that Jesus was a real, historical figure in first century Palestine; However, your Sparky showed that such a position stands on on 'faith' not fact.

Much of the historical information presented in the film has been questioned for its accuracy. Areas questioned include:

  1. uncritical use of 19th century claims regarding "pagan Christs" such as Beddru of Japan and Devatat [2],
  2. use of early Christian writers like Justin Martyr [3],
  3. a shallow understanding regarding the writings of Paul and early Christianity. [4]

Some critics also take issue with the "ambush" style that Flemming uses at the end of his film when he returns to the Christian school of his youth. There he interviews a school administrator who appears to have agreed to the interview without being fully aware of the nature of the arguments Flemming puts forth in the film. The interview subject terminates the interview when Flemming begins asking questions about the nature of Christianity and evangelization.


After a world premiere in San Francisco on May 21, 2005, the film was released simultaneously on DVD and in theatrical exposure. The theatrical exposure varied from a one-week run in Los Angeles to individual local screenings sponsored by supporters. (A similar approach was successful for Robert Greenwald's documentary Uncovered: The Whole Truth About the Iraq War and other Greenwald films.) The documentary has been shown in Stanford, Birmingham, New York, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Nevada, Virginia, Louisville, Toronto, Kansas City and Norway. Unlike the majority of theatrical productions released on DVD, The God Who Wasn't There includes theatrical screening rights (called "public performance rights" in the industry), so that anyone who buys it can hold a screening, including a screening for paid admission.

On April 11, 2006, the War on Easter promotional campaign was launched, whereby the first 666 people who hide copies of the DVD in churches win replacement DVDs.

See also

External links


“The Jesus Myth is a historical theory usually associated with a skeptical position on the historicity of Jesus, which claims that Jesus did not exist as an historical figure, but was, instead, an abstract, symbolic, and metaphorical allusion to a higher knowledge. The heart of the debate is as old as Christianity itself; even some early Christians who subscribed to a docetic Christology rejected the notion of a corporeal Jesus, though they still accepted his divinity. The theory, based in part on the lack of extant contemporaneous documents or other historically reliable evidence about his life, has not found widespread acceptance among Bible scholars and historians.[1] ...

Notable omissions in extant contemporary records

Some of the strongest evidence against the historicity of Jesus lies in the fact that no mention of him or the events of the New Testament can be found in any of the numerous contemporary and near-contemporary records of the day.

Philo (20 BCE - 40 CE)

By far, the most notable omission is Philo's. Philo was a Hellenized Jew who lived in Alexandria, Egypt. He visited the Temple in Jerusalem, and corresponded with family there. He wrote a great many books on religion and philosophy which survive to this day, and mentioned many of his contemporaries. His main theological contribution was the development of the Logos, the "Word" that opens the Gospel of John. Yet Philo not once mentions Jesus, anybody who could be mistaken for Jesus, or any of the events of the New Testament. His last writings come from 40 CE, only a few years after the end of Pontius Pilate's reign, when he was part of an embassy sent by the Alexandrian Jews to the Roman Emperor Caligula.

Seneca (ca. 54 BCE - ca. 39 CE)

Seneca the Elder wrote many philosophic (Stoic) and satirical books and letters (and Tragedies) in Rome. He wrote a great deal on many subjects and mentioned many people. He was a Stoic, a school of thought considered sympathetic to Christian teachings. Even if Jesus was nothing more than a popular rebel preacher, it is possible that he would have caught Seneca's attention.

Seneca's omission was sufficiently troublesome to certain early Christians that they forged correspondence between Seneca and St. Paul. Jerome, in de Viris Illustribus 12, and Augustine, in Epistle 153.4 ad Macedonium, both make reference of the forged communication.

Plutarch (ca. 46 - 127)

Plutarch wrote, about the same time as Josephus, about contemporary Roman figures, oracles, prophesies, and moral, religious, and spiritual issues. A figure such as Jesus, whom the Gospels portray as interacting with Roman figures, making prophecies, and giving sermons on novel religious and spiritual issues, would have been of great interest to him.


Justus of Tiberias wrote, at the end of the first century, a history of Jewish kings in Galilee. As the Gospels record Jesus as having significant interactions with the Jewish political and religious leaders, as well as the highest-ranking local Roman officials, one would expect Justus to have made mention of those events. Not all of his writing has survived intact to this day, but none of what does exist makes mention of Jesus. Further, no mention is made--especially by early Christian apologists--of such a reference, even by writers who would have had access to his complete works.

Josephus (ca. 37 - ca. 100)

Honest historians reject the authenticity of both the Testamonium Flavanium and the xx.9 reference to James, Josephus would belong on this list.


There are a number of other sources that survive from the period in which it would not have been unreasonable to find mention of Jesus, though in no particular case would one be surprised to find mention of Jesus lacking. However, Jesus is missing from all of them.

These include: Damis, who wrote of Apollonius of Tyana, a philosopher and mystic who was a contemporary with Jesus; Pliny the Elder, who wrote, in 80 CE, a Natural History that mentions hundreds of people, major and minor; Juvenal, Martial, Petronius, and Persius, Roman satirists who favored topics similar to Jesus's story; Pausanias, whose massive Guide to Greece includes mentions of thousands of names, including minor Jewish figures in Palestine; historians Epictetus and Aelius Aristides, who both recorded events and people in Palestine; and Fronto who, in the second century, scandalized rites about Roman Christians without ever mentioning Jesus.

Other writers and historians of the time who did not mention Jesus include Dio Chrysostom, Aulus Gellius, Lucius Apuleius, Marcus Aurelius, Musonius Rufus, Hierocles of Alexandria, Cassius Maximus Tyrius, Arrian, Appian, Marcus Fabius Quintilianus, Lucius Annaeus Florus, and Marcus Annaeus Lucanus. ... ”

There - just a taste - Sparky

Some websites to visit:
From the Desk of Patrick J. Fitzgerald
Firedoglake - Firedoglake weblog