The sand, silvered, carries the moon on its shoulders

Several Democrats, including Lantos, spoke in support of H Res 375 (82 cosponsors), as did one Republican, Leach. Hyde put the vote off until 2 p.m. ET.
Debate shifted to a very similar resolution from Rep. Hinchey (H Res 408) (0 cosponsors), and so continued to focus on the Downing Street Minutes.
At 12:25, Hyde shifted the debate to H Res 419 (20 cosponsors), Rep. Holt's Resolution of Inquiry into the exposure of Valerie Plame's identity.
At 12:39 Rep. Barbara Lee spoke about the erosion of democracy and about the obligation of a committee that authorized war to provide the public with the reasons the nation went to war, the reasons our resources (over $300 billion)were spent on that war and unavailable for this country.
At 12:45 Hyde recessed until 2 p.m., at which time the committee will vote on all three resolutions.
Hyde noted that two members are absent: Royce and Payne (a likely no and yes vote, respectively).
They voted at 2 p.m. and we lost by 1 vote, with a few members of each party absent, one Republican (Leach) voting with all the Dems, and one Republican (Paul) voting "present." We came very close, created a debate, and actually saw the Democrats unite and stand for something.

Ask Your Congress Member to Co-Sponsor H Res 375, which will be acted on in the International Relations Committee between today and Sept. 15.
If passed, H Res 375 will require the White House and the State Department to "transmit all information relating to communication with officials of the United Kingdom between January 1, 2002, and October 16, 2002, relating to the policy of the United States with respect to Iraq." It has the support of most, and possibly all, of the Democrats on the IR committee, and of at least one Republican on that committee. We need every Dem and three Republicans to pass it.

Email Your Congress Member.Phone and Fax Your Congress Member.Or call switchboard tollfree at (888) 818-6641.Fill out feedback form.Here are current co-sponsors.More Info.

Published on Sunday, September 4, 2005 by the San Francisco Chronicle
Bush's New Reasons for the Iraq War
by Helen Thomas

President Bush , apparently running out of rationales for the U.S. war in Iraq, has resorted to putting that ill-planned invasion in the same category as World War II.
Bush tried to wrap himself in the aura of Franklin D. Roosevelt last week when he commemorated the 60th anniversary of V-J Day. With public opinion polls showing more and more Americans critical of the Iraq war, Bush used the anniversary ceremonies at the naval air station in San Diego to express concern that Americans might return to a "pre-mindset of isolation and retreat, " indicating that it was the same as the isolationism that Franklin D. Roosevelt encountered before the Pearl Harbor attack.
Making his third speech in a week to rally public support for the war, Bush compared his resolve to FDR's during World War II. He said the U.S. mission in Iraq is to turn that country into a democratic ally, just as the United States did with Japan after World War II.
Bush is off base in making a comparison between the Iraqi conflict and World War II. For one thing, the United States instigated the current war with an unprovoked attack on Iraq.
If the World War II analogy doesn't convince you, the president came up with yet another defense for the U.S. invasion. He warned that terrorists such as Osama bin Laden would take over its oil fields if the United States loses in Iraq.
A key difference between Bush and FDR is that Roosevelt knew the value of having allies and friends in wartime.
Roosevelt believed strongly in collective security and helped pave the way for creation of the United Nations. Bush has already shown his disdain for that organization with his go-it-alone foreign policy.
Bush had a world of goodwill when al Qaeda delivered its catastrophic attack on Sept. 11. But he squandered this reservoir with the unilateral invasion of Iraq, which had nothing to do with Sept. 11. To this day, Bush artfully -- and shamefully -- continues to link Iraq with Sept. 11.
Bush has not won supporters for the war nor has he produced any justification for the sacrifice of Americans and Iraqis.
Roosevelt envisioned a future world of peace after the war. Bush looks at Iraq as "the first war of the 21st century."

Don't Give Your Hurricane Donations to the Red

Cross source: Prison Planet

Establishment charities have history of withholding disaster funds Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones September 1 2005 As the aftermath of hurricane Katrina continues to wreak mayhem and havoc amid reports of mass looting, shooting at rescue helicopters, rapes and murders, establishment media organs are promoting the Red Cross as a worthy organization to give donations to. The biggest website in the world, Yahoo.com, displays a Red Cross donation link prominently on its front page. Every time there is a major catastrophe the Red Cross and similar organizations like United Way are given all the media attention while other charities are left in the shadows. This is not to say that the vast majority of Red Cross workers are not decent people who simply want to help those in need. But what the media fails consistently to remember in their promotion of the organization is that the Red Cross have been caught time and time again withholding money in the wake of horrible disasters that require immediate release of funds. The Red Cross, under the Liberty Fund, collected $564 million in donations after 9/11. Months after the event, the Red Cross had distributed only $154 million. The Red Cross' explanation for keeping the majority of the money was that it would be used to help 'fight the war on terror'. To the victims, this meant that the money was going towards bombing broken backed third world countries like Afghanistan and setting up surveillance cameras and expanding the police state in US cities, and not towards helping them rebuild their lives. Then Red Cross President Dr. Bernadine Healy arrogantly responded when questioned about the withholding of funds by stating, "The Liberty Fund is a war fund. It has evolved into a war fund." Despite the family members of victims of 9/11 complaining bitterly to a House Energy and Commerce Committee's oversight panel, the issue seemed to be brushed under the carpet and the mud didn't stick. The Red Cross' scandalous activities reach back far before 9/11. After the devastating San Francisco earthquake in 1989, the Red Cross passed on only $10 million of the $50 million that had been raised, and banked the rest. Similar donations after the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995 and the Red River flooding in 1997 were also greedily withheld. Smaller charities that were involved with the 2004 Tsunami relief project went public to say that large charities like Red Cross and United Way were engaged in secret backroom negotiations with each other that meant a large portion of the donation money was purposefully restricted from reaching the most needy areas affected by the disaster. The history is clear, the Red Cross and other large so-called charities are in actual fact front group collection agencies for the military industrial complex. Many informed historians have even alleged that the Red Cross was used as a Skull and Bones cover to overthrow The Russian Czar and pave the way for the rise of the Bolsheviks. Do not give any money to the Red Cross unless you support the expansion of empire abroad and police state at home. Find a smaller trustworthy organization in the local area of New Orleans and make your donation to them.