January 14, 2002

The Big Brother Files #27: The NWO Atrocities, Lies and Tyrannic Laws

Hello everyone

You will receive this week some of the worst, despicably abject material I have ever networked, and some very good stuff in between for some balance.

In our collective quest for truth, we are fast approaching the bottom of what needs to be exposed to the full blasting Light of love and healing compassion for those lost souls in such dire need of soul awakening.

Jean Hudon
Earth Rainbow Network Coordinator


1. The Unspeakable Horrors Caused by Depleted Uranium in Military Warfare
2. Will Thomas resurfaces!
3. FBI continues to cover up pilot communications related to Sept. 11
4. Canada's Globalization, Militarization, Police State Agenda in anti-Terrorism laws



Depleted Uranium in Afghanistan

Depleted Uranium or Depleted Conscience?
(...) Pentagon officials finally admitted, that "depleted uranium intended for armour-piercing weapons had been contaminated by small amounts of plutonium" and other highly toxic nuclear by-products as a result of the plant recycling nuclear waste into the depleted uranium sometime in the 1980s. What is even more troubling is that the Pentagon has known since at least 1995 that the DU had been contaminated and continued to use the material anyway. (...) According to several Pakistani newspapers, these suspicions are, in fact, a reality. "A leading military expert told Dawn that since October 7 the United States Air Force has been raining down depleted uranium shells at targets inside Afghanistan, especially against the Taliban front lines in the north." (22) The Weekly Independent similarly states, "Hard target weapons loaded with reprocessed nuclear waste have been used as secret weapons in the US-led air strikes against the Taliban, exposing human lives in Afghanistan and the adjoining border areas of Pakistan to a serious risk of radiation poisoning." (23) It then cites evidence of Taliban troops and Afghan civilians alike being exposed to the depleted uranium and quotes Defense Department spokesperson Kenneth Bacon indirectly confirming the use of DU in the area. "Reports emanating from Afghanistan," the newspaper goes on to state, "reveal that after the fall of the Taliban and the landing of allied forces there, the troops and aid agencies have been told to proceed with caution," steering clear of any and all of the locations bombed by allied forces. (...)

Adverse health effects due to depleted uranium (and its many other contaminants) have been seen throughout the world. The 944,000 rounds fired in Iraq, the 31,000 rounds fired in Serbia, and the 10,000 rounds fired in Bosnia can testify to that. Despite well-documented knowledge of the health and environmental consequences that ensue, the Pentagon has not eliminated depleted uranium from its arsenal, but has instead continued its use. Most likely, Afghanistan is now the next in a growing list of those whose fate will forever be intertwined with depleted uranium. This issue must be pushed to the forefront because the people of Afghanistan cannot afford any further tragedy. CLIP

Information Brief On Depleted Uranium

U.S. Bombings To Have Lasting Effects: Experts

US Used Nuclear Waste

Depleted Uranium Toxicity in Afghanistan
The possibility of radioactive dust storms sweeping across Afghanistan and polluting rivers has sparked fears in Pakistan. The radioactive dust released by the impact of these weapons can easily get into the food chain and the water supply through the Kabul River in Afghanistan and thus into Pakistan's Indus River. There are simply no contingency measures to brace people against such a disastrous humanitarian fallout.

U.S. expert says use of DU munitions a "war crime"
"When you deliberately and wilfully take radioactive waste... and throw it down in place in the world where children can pick it up and be exposed to it... that's a crime against humanity and it is a war crime."


This document looks at the debate over DU weapons. Depleted uranium is one of the heaviest metals on earth and easy to mould into shells which are dense enough to penetrate heavy armour. It does not exist in nature but is a byproduct of atomic power generation and is radioactive, with a half-life of **4.5 billion years.** According to the Pentagon, 940 000 shells with more than 300 tonnes of depleted uranium were discharged during the Gulf War. (...) Before the Gulf War, US military analysts had repeatedly expressed the gravest reservations about its deployment, citing health risks to both military and civilian populations. With a radioactive half-life of four and a half billion years, the stakes involved in the proliferation of this new weapon are enormous, for the public, and for the earth itself. (...) In 1991, the UK Atomic Energy Authority warned that, if particles from merely 8 per cent of the DU used in the Gulf were inhaled, there could be "300,000 potential deaths". (...) In Basra's hospitals, the cancer wards are overflowing. Before the Gulf war, they did not exist. "The dust carries death," Dr Jawad Al-Ali, a cancer specialist and member of Britain's Royal College of Physicians, told me. "Our own studies indicate that more than 40 per cent of the population in this area will get cancer in five years' time to begin with, then long afterwards.

"Unborn children of Irak are being asked to pay the highest price, the integrity of their DNA."

National Network to End the War Against Irak

Sign the petition opposing expanding the "war on terrorism" to Iraq


From: "Will Thomas" <willthomas@telus.net>
Subject: Will Thomas resurfaces!
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002

Dear Friends,


As many of you know, I have been working flat-out, nearly around-the-clock for the past several months investigating the events surrounding Sept. 11. Sorting fact from fiction and new American myths has been challenging, exhausting and educational in the folly of jumping off the cliff of hasty and erroneous conclusions. Not to mention compellingly more fascinating than tracing any fictional mystery story. The answers I've come up with so far concerning this ongoing cover-up rival revelations documented in Scorched Earth and Bringing The War Home.

They ought to. They are all connected.

Please go at http://www3.bc.sympatico.ca/Willthomas/AFD/AFD.htm for the latest edition of ALL FALL DOWN: The Politics of Terror and Mass Persuasion - now available with a fabulous cover by "Chemtrails: Mystery Lines in Sky" video co-producer Paul Grignon - fully updated as of Jan. 1, 2002.

What about chemtrails, you're asking?

Ah yes, those pesky jet trails are still with us. As many of you reported, the skies over North America were anything but empty of sky spoor when all airliners were grounded on Sept. 11 and 12.

Airlines were tentatively taking to the air on drastically reduced schedules three days later. But in what seemed like a special obscenity during our grief and shock, the chemplanes continued their missions - obscuring our skies and crucial issues of accountability, made all the more urgent by the attacks on Black Tuesday.

After watching from the sidelines as mainstream media mavens avoided asking the most important questions, I elected to engage the predatory perpetrators and facilitators of Sept. 11 in the best way I could: by documenting and exposing their deeds.

I also continued to track chemtrails with your help, reading and filing hundreds of email reports along with media coverage.

To my surprise, this issue did not go away. Even in their shock and outrage over the massacre in Manhattan and the (unannounced) shootdown over Pennsylvania, Americans and Canadians continued their concern over chemtrails. The TV and radio programs I appeared on in Ontario lit up the switchboards with chemtrails callers - including a veteran Air Canada captain who told viewers that the 'trails he is observing are not contrails.

While not directly linked, everyone understands that these events continue to be aided and abetted by the same "shadow government" officials (whom I name in All Fall Down) - in what is a silent coup.


Finally, in a fit of long overdue house cleaning, I have completely revamped my website for 2002. The new William Thomas - Lifeboat News website is easier to navigate and much faster to download. Please check it out at http://www3.bc.sympatico.ca/Willthomas/homepage.html


Let's close this letter and start the New Year with some words of encouragement.

If things seem dark, desperate and completely crazy - if you are feeling used, abused and manipulated by agents and agencies beyond your control - take heart! The worse things get, the more optimistic I become.

Why? Because of that great and irrefutable karmic law that says:

There is always a reaction, always a reckoning, always a rebalancing.

As events unfold at a quickening pace, I am convinced that this time the "controllers" (named in AFD) are not going to get away with it. The sickening events in NYC, the agony of Afghanistan, the cynical hypocrisies pouring from a robo-president's easily-read lips are pushing a lot of people everywhere very very very close to saying: "ENOUGH!"

When they do - when we walk away with our bodies, brains and wallets from this tired old scam of selling "wars" against defenseless countries for profit and deception - everything changes. When powerful ideas become an impulse moving at the speed of net-mediated thought.

It can happen overnight.

The difference my good friends is the Internet. The "War Against Terrorism" that continues to coddle the real terrorists - the "war" against the most mined, malnourished and impoverished people on this planet - has for the first time run up against the power of a worldwide web that is bringing people from every culture together with information and perspectives not controlled by political and corporate agendas.

This is unprecedented.

Thanks to "USA Today", CNN and other propaganda networks, media mesmerizers managed to market a mass-slaughter that has so far killed 1 million Iraqi people - most of them children under the age of 15. But when a scandal-plagued president named Clinton tried another mass bombing of mass distraction, the resulting worldwide outcry deluging the White House in emails, faxes and phone calls stopped the bombers literally as they were being taxied to the catapults on the carriers.

Like the amazing and heartening reconciliation process in South Africa, this suppressed news event was epochal. And I believe it's about to be repeated. If Bush goes after families in Baghdad, if chemtrails continue - these massive frauds against patriotic public trust are going to backfire massively on their originators.

Plan on it. Be a part of it. Inform yourself. Spread the word. Speak up, speak out on the new Anti-American and Canadian laws - especially on all attempts to route our email and Internet connections through government servers. Such repressive filtering by the "thought police" is not working in Communist China. And they are not going to work here.

Resist much. Obey little. Do not be afraid to stand up. The only way a small wealthy elite can get away with their bogus control trip is when people forget that by standing together we do not have to be afraid to act.

Though they can sometimes be of use, we don't need presidents, priests or pundits to direct our lives. As you know in the daily adventure of your own life, the rightful practice of power has nothing to do with bombs or bank accounts. Real power comes through our hearts from outside of us when we align ourselves to it as receiving dishes tuned to truth, compassion and love for all creatures, great and small.

Have a wonder-filled New Year.

William Thomas


All Fall Down: The Politics of Terror and Mass Persuasion

Probing The Chemtrails Conundrum (new edition)

William Thomas
Heron Rocks 1-9
Hornby Island, BC

See also:

Book Excerpts from All fall Down


Sent by Ken <NCEpanacea@aol.com>

FBI continues to cover up pilot communications related to Sept. 11

Joel Skousen's World Affairs Brief

In all major conspiratorial events, evidence related to the event continues to surface over time, and if the government is involved, it demonstrates its collusion by the degree to which it attempts to suppress and cover up the emerging evidence. As in the JFK assassination and the downing of TWA 800 by a missile, we are beginning to see the same pattern of obfuscation, denial, and cover-up by federal agencies in the September 11th tragedy -- especially by the FBI, the military, and the FAA.

Some of the biggest questions about the events of 9/11 center around the hijacking of the various airliners: how the pilots reacted, and what actions the government took via the military to impede the results. Pilots have instant access to Air Traffic Control (ATC) with a push of a button on the control yoke. In contrast, it takes time for a hijacker to take over the cabin and then deal with the pilots who are in a separate compartment behind a locked aluminum sliding door. We know, by FAA admission, that in each and every case the pilots had time to communicate their emergency to ATC. In at least two cases the pilots were able to change the transponder code to 7700 for "emergency in progress" before the hijackers took control and switched off the transponder. The FAA and US military have standing orders and written procedures on how to intercept and deal with aircraft hijackings.

The FAA has said that it alerted military authorities in Colorado at the first signs of a hijacking. Yet we know that a few aircraft were scrambled and that all others were grounded and prohibited from reacting according to standing procedures. One of my subscribers is friends with an air traffic controller at McGuire AFB in New Jersey. His friend confided to him that "he was on duty at the time of the crashes into the towers. They got a phone call in between the first and second 'hit'. His superior told him that 'NO take-off's were permitted ... NONE at all.'" This was too early to be a direct result of shutting down all flights nationwide -- which only affected private and commercial flights -- not military. Here we have evidence of the US military acting in direct opposition to national defense -- acting on orders from above. These orders couldn't have come from Bush, who was engaged at an elementary school, so higher military officials were either taking orders from someone else at the White House or acting on predetermined orders.

I find it also very strange that flight data and voice recorders from all the 9/11 crashes except Flight 93 (which crashed or was shot down over Pennsylvania) have been declared not found, destroyed, or unreadable. These declarations are without precedent in aviation accident history, and especially preposterous when we consider that the FBI claims to have found letters, passports and other fragile documents belonging to the supposed Arab hijackers amidst the tons of rubble of the WTC -- and yet they couldn't find crash hardened data recorders. The data and voice recorders are designed to survive both the crash and resulting fire and almost always do. Why not this time?

Now the FBI tells us they will not be releasing the lone cockpit voice recorder that survived Flight 93 because "it would be too traumatic for the surviving families." What could be more traumatic that what they already know? This is just another blatant excuse to withhold even more information about the tragedies. There has to be a good reason why the FBI refuses to release this voice recorder, and I think it has to do with the fact that it may not have been a hijacking at all that took down this aircraft.

It is becoming evident that Flight 93 was shot down by an unmarked white jet that was seen intercepting Flight 93 and following it down as it crashed. The jet was witnessed in detail by several people on the ground. One military witness claims he heard a missile being fired. In addition, the main body of the engine of Flight 93 was found miles from the main wreckage site, with damage comparable to that which a heat seeking missile would do to an airliner. There were also personal papers, and articles of clothing from the plane found miles from the crash. The government is now saying these were carried up into the air by the crash fireball -- but no such occurrence has happened in other crashes. The existing body of evidence is found at on a website at http://www.flight93crash.com. The author of the website doesn't draw any conclusions except that Flight 93 didn't go down as the public has been told and that the government knows why and isn't telling.



Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002
From: Connie Fogal <conniefogal@telus.net>
Subject: Rocco Galati on Canada's Globalization, Militarization, Police State Agenda in anti-Terrorism laws

Canada's Anti-Terrorism Laws - Bills C36, C22, C35, C42

Presentation by Rocco Galati at a forum sponsored by the Scientists For Peace Toronto, December 2001

Canada's Globalization, Militarization, Police State Agenda

My name is Rocco Galati. I am a constitutional lawyer. I was a lawyer for the Crown for a few years before I went into private practice cases against the government. I was the counsel who brought the MAI case up through the courts to the Supreme Court of Canada, and argued the Quebec city injunction perimeter fence case up to the Supreme Court of Canada. I have been doing CSIS terrorist certificate cases under the Immigration Act, the so called secret trials that are now going to be part of C36 secret trial mechanism.

In a nutshell, what is in Bill C 36, and is undoubtedly not open for debate, what Bill C 36 does is as follows. It has very little to do with terrorism. Terrorism is very easy to define. I have defined it for clients of mine appearing before parliamentary and senate committees.

Terrorism is a very simply definition. It is the application of terrorism that is all the problem. I define terrorism as the threat of or use of violence and arms by an armed group or individual against an unarmed group or individual for political, racial, religious, social, or economic reasons including state terrorism. You can take any other armed conflict whether it is two people dueling at dawn over a woman 200 years ago, or two groups in an insurrection or civil war, or war, or somebody doing it for profit, or drug running. We have laws to cover that, but that is not terrorism.

The only problem with a definition of that sort is that you have to apply it equally, and that's where we get into problems, because certain states want to be able to support terrorism when it suits their needs. My only point is that this bill has very little to do with terrorism in the sense that the first speaker was speaking about.

1. What this bill does is really codify militarization and a police state, and further globalization interests. You see it right in the bill. The Bill is overly broad. Even though they took out the "lawful", the Bill still catches dissent. It still catches protest. Protests that interrupt public facilities are acts of terrorism under this bill. No question about it, whether they are "lawful" or not, if they endanger life. Any protest that is going to cut off a part of the city from essential services like ambulances by definition endangers life. That is the price we pay in democracy. That is a terrorist act under this Bill.

2. The other thing the Bill does is that it can convict you of facilitating terrorism without any knowledge or intent. The government pretended that they changed the definition, but they didn't. They changed it in one section and they took ir away in another. Even if you don't know you are facilitating, you are going to get caught. So the guy who sells the envelopes and the stamps at the corner store in my view is facilitating terrorism when the purchaser puts anthrax in them and mails them off, whether he knows it or not.

3. Then there is the 72 hour arrest on suspicion. The only test here is you can be held here for 72 hours without being charged on suspicion. That is not a test. That is not even a smell test. What is the suspicion going to be based on? It will be based on another portion of the Bill which allows the Court and police "in determining whether an accused participates in or contributes to any activity of a terrorist group the court may consider among other factors whether the accused uses a name, word, symbol, or other representation that identifies or is associated with the terrorist group".

Now if I look around this room, I can probably pick out five or six women here who I find suspicious because the legislation allows it. So if you use the same religious or codeful symbols that some terrorist group has misappropriated for their own purpose, even though they are valid religious or cultural symbols of Islam or being Arab or being Tamil or being Sikh, then the legislation grants the police and the Courts the right to use that as the basis of suspicion. In my language that is just racist profiling. Racism, that is all it is.

So the 72 hour detentions are also problematic because there is no stop to the revolving door. One police officer on suspicion will arrest you for the 72 hours. You are released. That is not to say they can't come back in 12 hours or 12 minutes and re-arrest you on another suspicion. So you can go around the revolving door this way. And they can put conditions on you similar to bail conditions even though you are not charged or arrested with anything, for a year at least without charging.

4. Investigative hearings are nothing short of Roman Catholic Inquisitions. That is all they are, maybe without the torture, maybe not. But who knows what people get tortured. Every group in this country has suffered torture at police hands. That's documented.

So you are hauled in, and you have to answer questions. If you don't answer questions, you are subject to criminal charge. They say they can't use the answers against you in a court. Well, that's not true because (1) they can use the answers to go engage in further investigation outside the answers, and that evidence can be used in court. (2) If you ever take the stand to defend yourself, the case law is clear they can use your answers to say that you are lying. So it is not true that they can haul you in and anything you say will never be used against you in court.

5. Really nasty provisions that no one seems to be talking about, quite frankly because they are so foreign to our law and our experience, are the secret trial provisions. Right now in Canada, there is only one instance where you get secret trials - that is on CSIS terrorist cases under the Immigration Act. That is where someone is accused of being a terrorist or associated with terrorism. What happens when they allege that you are a terrorist is that you never get to see the evidence. Your lawyer never gets to see the evidence. All you get is a summary of the allegations against you. And then the lawyer for the government sits with the judge and they review the evidence. And then you go into open court, and the judge says, "What do you have to say in response to the fact that we say you are a terrorist?"

And so the game goes something like this: "I was born in a little village" somewhere, wherever. "I knew all these people", and you literally have to ransack through a person's life and hope that in doing so that you are addressing whatever evidence, distorted rumor or hearsay evidence that is before the judge.

So these secret trials are really foreign. They've been around since 1990 in Canada (under Immigration cases, not the Criminal Law) . There has only been one case where it was fought and won. That was a case I fought and won two years ago. It was called Jibala. A case from Egypt. But lo and behold they re-arrested him again even though the federal court said there is nothing to the allegation. They re-arrested him this August and we are back on the merry go round.

So now under, C36 at various stages, if the police or the CSIS or RCMP say, "I can't answer that question, I can't divulge that evidence because it's "national security" (they usually lower their voice to say that) then you don't get to see it. That's very dangerous because our whole system is based on testing the evidence against you.

6. That also goes for the confiscation of property. These secret trials allow for the confiscation of property as well. So your daughter has a friend who is Muslim who has a brother who may be associated with a group that is on the list. Let's say there is any money that transfers. Let's say your daughter is helping you with the mortgage, but she gets some help from her brother to pay the mortgage. They can and will confiscate your house. You will never know why.

Because that money is coming indirectly from a terrorist source, even though you don't know that your daughter is getting money from her brother, and he's associated with somebody, that property can and will be confiscated, and you will never know why. You will never see the evidence, and nobody will know why your property is getting confiscated, except for a bald allegation that is tied to terrorism.

7. Lastly, I want to say I personally find all this legislation C36, C35, C22, C 42 offensive:

C35 which broadens state immunity to state terrorists or dignitaries from abroad from international organization. If they are terrorists its OK. They are immune from our law; C22 that makes lawyers spies for the government. They have to report suspicious activity and not tell their client; and C42 that's just been introduced which allows ministers to delegate authority to their officers to declare military security zones on the spot, issue orders on the spot, and nobody can discuss the orders, even the subject of the order, because if you discuss it or publicize it, that's a separate criminal offence;

If you take all these bills together, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that what we have here is a road map for, essentially, I am not exaggerating, a military junta, really in the hands of four cabinet ministers who can delegate right down to the ground. That what's happening. If you look at, and there's no argument against this if you look at the legislation, it is so offensive.

8. The last point I want to make about this globalization and the militarization of that agenda is that if you look at the definition of terrorism, what they have done is very reptilian, very slivery, so nasty. They have included in the definition of terrorism "threats to and including its economic security". So if you do anything that threatens the economic security of Canada, you are engaging in a terrorist act. Now, in addition to all the problems of protest, there is something even more insidious than this than just what is found in the definition of terrorism. Another part of this omnibus bill (Bill C 36) is that they‚ve re-defined the Official Secrets Act and renamed it the State Security Act. Under that legislation, S3 of that act (Official Secrets Act) which is S.27 of this Bill C36, it says "for the purpose of this act a purpose is prejudicial to the safety or interest of the state if a person..." Then there are various thing that a person can do to endanger the security of the state: (a) "interferes with the service facility or system or computer program" (b) "damages property" (c) (really offensive) "adversely affects the stability of the Canadian economy, a financial system, or any financial market in Canada without reasonable economic or financial justification" So boycotts of the markets or the banks on ethical or environmental grounds are now an act of terrorism. When you grasp that that's "the economic security of the country" via the Official Secrets Act, now the State Security Act, you can't even have financial dissent.

And then, here are the ones that are really nice. (d) "impairs or threatens the capability of the government or the Bank of Canada to protect against or respond to economic or financial threats or instability

(e) "impairs or threatens the capability of the government of Canada to conduct diplomatic or consular relations or conduct and manage international negotiation. So, no more Quebec city protests. They are all an act of terrorism. No protesting any stock marke,t any financial market, or ethical or environment laws. So that's how broad this bill is, and that's how broad the net has been cast.

Answers to questions:

1. Q; Charter Rights: A: There is not one single right in the Charter that has been developed from the Magna Carta to the English Bill of Rights, to the French Declaration of the Rights of Man, to the U.S. Bill of Rights, to the U.N. Charter, to the Canadian Bill of Rights, and to our Charter that has not been urinated upon and buried. There is not one right that it does not completely undo. You name me the right and I will tell you how it does it.

2. Q; A: CSIS secret trials: CSIS secret trials in our Immigration law resulted from pressure from the USA against the Muslim and Arab communities. The Mulroney government put in the secret trial provisions back in the 80's.

3. Q: Can these Bills be overruled? A: Once you get handcuffed, and you get a lawyer, and you spend so much time in pre-hearing custody in the Metro West Detention Center where they put you in a hole for 18 out of 24 , you get 5 minutes in the yard if you are lucky. You do not get to phone your family or your lawyer. That is what is happening now with an immigration hold. Then you go in front of judge and you can make a Charter challenge. Then the court may or may not strike it. But you know, charter challenges and judicial court review are no substitutes for proper political debate and social economic balance in a society.

We were in front of the Senate the other day, and they sighed in relief that of course we were going to challenge it in the Courts and we said, "That is not a proper substitute. Do not be going to sleep hoping that we challenge it. It is your job to put in a proper bill." This is where it is offensive.

4. A: I was an ex Crown Attorney. I read this bill as if I were prosecuting.

5. A: C42 is even worse than C36 .

6. Q: What motivated our government to put in these Bills?

A: I am not shy in saying this given my work on the MAI case and the Quebec city case. Anyone in tune with globalization protests and the agenda of the government (whether or not globalization is a good or bad thing, I am not going to reveal my true beliefs cause I don't want to get fired by my clients but ) it became clear to the government of Canada that they were losing the handle on the globalization issue and I think they stomped on us. In fact, I know from friends of friends from the Justice Department in Ottawa that they were just foaming at the mouth when they got this opportunity, (hundreds of justice lawyers working on this). This thing has to do with giving globalization a military and police state so that nobody can protest. They can bash our heads now legally. They've been doing it anyway. So that's what motivated the government.