valenzuelaclan

Hey:  no more fun filled family news from the valenzuelaclan?  It's been very silent lately!!!!

So, who would make a better president, Bush or Tic Tacs? you decide.

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=tictacs

This is the "pater familia" here on the first visit to the valenzuela site.......   I will be contributing shortly with some pictures from France.

Abrazos a todos.

Just to let you know that Alejandra is finally at home..... after 8 months in intensive care.  I've spoken to her twice and she is in incredibly good spirits..... In case you want to drop a note, her email is Alejandra Alvarez
  alealvarezb@yahoo.com 

 

 

 

 

 

 

hey guys, so this is it...it's official.  one more week at my currently wretched lasering job before i quit to begin my deeper endeavors into the unknown world of Urban Allure SF!  I personally am very pleased with my letter since it is very honest (ok, except the part about the "associations" i've made...and it being a "pleasure working there"....) since much of it can be interpreted as positive or negative depending on who's reading.  Anyhow, I thought you all might like a read...and i just wanted to check in with everyone!  Miss you.  Erin      .....

Please accept this letter as my formal notice of resignation from Aneu, effective September 30, 2005.  The associations I’ve made here at Aneu will be very difficult to leave behind.

I would like to thank you deeply for giving me such a wonderful opportunity to try something new and interesting in the world of Nursing.  It’s been a pleasure working for you over the past 4 years.  You taught me a great deal of things I could not have learned elsewhere.

I hope this notice is sufficient for you to find a replacement (or to adjust the other nurse’s schedules).  If I can help train a replacement or tie up any loose ends, please let me know.

Thank you again for giving me such a unique experience here at Aneu.

Sincerely,

Erin Galvin, RN

Hello everybody,

I write to cordially invite you all to visit the Flying Valenzuela Gallery.... nico and i hope u enjoy the pics!!

don´t forget to post and comment...

fran.

ps: take a good look at "lap dance..."

Published on Wednesday, September 21, 2005 by the Seattle Post-Intelligencer 
We Can't Say We Weren't Warned 
by Richard Steiner
 
In the week before Hurricane Katrina struck, the U.S. government was busy insisting on the deletion of a simple phrase from the general principles of the United Nations -- "Respect for Nature." History may now look on Katrina as the perfect storm that ended, once and for all, such anthropocentric arrogance.

The scale of the Katrina tragedy offers a painful portal into our very heart and soul, the way we think about ourselves, one another and our world. In the rubble of homes and lives and businesses, Katrina provides a potent teachable moment for society.

The evolutionary success of Homo sapiens as a species depended on our ability to learn and to act on that knowledge. When we recognized a threat -- predators, weather, lack of resources, etc. -- we learned to act to avoid or prepare for it. In this context, Katrina has much to teach.

First, prepare for the worst. It is a historic, national disgrace that we did not do better. Katrina was a well-predicted flood disaster, a well-predicted storm and, to those observers of government bureaucracies, a well-predicted failure of government altogether.

Next, prevent disaster to the extent possible. A decade ago, Louisiana's "Coast 2050" plan recognized that a century of flood control on the Mississippi was shrinking the wetlands, bayous, barrier islands and the entire delta of our nation's greatest river, and, if left uncorrected, would with certainty lead to catastrophe. It was not a "0.5 percent probability" as the Army Corps of Engineers is now claiming. It was a certainty.

Scientists proposed a straightforward $14 billion pre-emptive fix to the problem -- build canals and floodgates in the south bank of the river in New Orleans and periodically open them to allow the river and its millions of tons of sediment to flush onto the delta, rebuild barrier islands, thus protecting the coast from inundation in future storm events. This would take decades, but the sooner it begins, the sooner the area will be protected.

The threat was perfectly clear, the solution was perfectly clear, yet government did nothing. To officials, these warnings were typical of "environmental alarmists" and government had other more immediate priorities. When Katrina hit, this government attention deficit came tragically due.

Herein may lie our potential evolutionary downfall -- our modern inability to act decisively and cooperatively to avert certain disaster.

In this way, Katrina may provide -- in fast-forward microcosm -- a vision of the very future of Homo sapiens itself. The transcendent lesson of this perfect storm may be that the natural environment is ignored only at our own peril. As Katrina swept away lives and life-support systems on the Gulf Coast, the tragedy may give focus to the deteriorating condition of the essential environmental services the planet provides for the health and welfare of all 6.5 billion of us -- air, freshwater, food, shelter, energy, medicines, nutrient recycling, waste processing, enjoyment, etc.

History is littered with fallen civilizations that ignored their deteriorating environmental condition -- the Anasazi, Maya, Greenland Norse, Easter Islanders, etc. And like Exxon Valdez, Chernobyl and Bhopal, Katrina will now take its place in history as one of the seminal, time-compressed disasters that provide an overnight glimpse of the long-term degradation of the life-support systems of our home planet.

On this larger issue, the science is perfectly clear. We are dangerously degrading our biosphere, and for decades policy-makers have been warned of the dire consequences of ignoring this systemic environmental decline. As with New Orleans, we are all living on borrowed time. We are rapidly approaching a planetary tipping-point from which there will likely be no recovery. But just as with Katrina, governments have ignored warnings of global ecological collapse as well. How much longer can we afford such shortsighted, selfish ignorance?

In Greek mythology, Cassandra was bestowed the power to foretell the future but no one would believe her. She warned of a Trojan Horse, to no avail. The rest, as they say, is history.

Will we as a society learn from this perfect storm, reaffirm our "respect for nature" and attend to our deteriorating planetary life-support systems before it's too late, or not?

Richard Steiner is professor and conservation specialist at the University of Alaska.

© 2005 Seattle Post-Intelligencer

Agents Provocateurs?
William Bowles, I'n'I

September 22, 2005

Fascinating. No really, the ‘evolution’ of state disinformation has probably never been better displayed than in the case of the two (more than likely) SAS soldiers who were ‘liberated’ after being arrested by the Iraqi police on 19 September by a phalanx of tanks and helicopter gunships that stormed the police station where the two undercover soldiers were being held after they allegedly failed to stop at an Iraqi police roadblock and subsequently opened fire on the Iraqi police, killing one and wounding another.

The car they were travelling in was loaded with weapons including allegedly, assault rifles, a light machine gun, an anti-tank weapon, radio gear and a medical kit (’standard’ SAS issue according to the BBC). According to at least two reports, the car they were traveling in (A Toyota Cressida) was “booby-trapped”.

Subsequent accounts vary according to the source but according to the initial story broadcast on the BBC (19/9/05), the two men wore traditional Arab dress but then this changed to “civilian dress” (BBC TV News).

As more information trickled out, a BBC story reported that the men were freed after the police station had been attacked by British tanks, a report that the British government initially denied saying that “the release of the soldiers had been negotiated” (BBC Website 20/0/05).

Britain’s Ministry of Defence says the release of the two soldiers had been negotiated and it did not believe the prison had been stormed.

“We’ve heard nothing to suggest we stormed the prison,” a ministry spokesman said.

“We understand there were negotiations.”

Lisa Glover, spokeswoman for the British embassy in Baghdad, says three people have been wounded in the operation to free the soldiers.

She did not give further details of how the soldiers were freed.

Then the story changed yet again, only now the ‘official’ story, dutifully reported by the British State Broadcasting Company (BSBC), was that “negotiations broke down” and that the two men were in the hands of the Mehdi Army in another building, in which case, why was the police station stormed?

Then yet another version was issued by the British government only now the police station was indeed attacked but only after “negotiations broke down”. So were the two SAS men in the police station or not?

According to yet another BSBC report, after breaking into the police station, the Brits discovered that they had been moved to a Mehdi Army house for “interrogation”. Yet subsequent accounts revealed that they had in fact, been in the police station all along and, according to a CNN report, were being questioned by an Iraqi judge, not, as the British government alleged, by the ‘insurgents’.

By now, in a classic disinformation campaign, so many stories were being circulated that sorting out the truth from fiction was virtually impossible unless one is prepared to dig and dig deep.

What is clear is that the two SAS “undercover operatives” had been caught red-handed by the British government’s alleged allies, the Iraqi police, dressed as Arabs, replete with wigs and armed to the teeth and in a car which according to one report, was packed with explosives (the car by the way, has been taken away by the British occupation forces).

The question the BSBC was not and still is not asking, is what were they up to, creeping around dressed up as Iraqis in what is meant to be a relatively peaceful Basra?

Once more the BSBC answered the question, sort of, courtesy yet another ‘official’ story, one that was to emerge only after a very angry crowd attacked two British armoured vehicles, setting at least one on fire. The “mob”, as the BSBC described them, were according to the report, angry over the arrest of two Mehdi Army members, also on 19 September, and that it had nothing to with the freeing of the two SAS. In reality of course, the ‘mob’ had already been informed about the two SAS undercover guys and were understandably upset.

So now, the two undercover SAS men were, it is imputed, searching for ‘insurgents’ as part of a counter-insurgency operation, which if true, what were they doing dressed as Iraqis?

Were they on some kind of provocative operation? According to one report, this is exactly what they were up to. Fattah al-Shaykh, a member of the Iraqi National Assembly told this account to al-Jazeera

If you really want to look for truth, then we should resort to the Iraqi justice away from the British provocations against the sons of Basra, particularly what happened today when the sons of Basra caught two non-Iraqis, who seem to be Britons and were in a car of the Cressida type. It was a booby-trapped car laden with ammunition and was meant to explode in the centre of the city of Basra in the popular market. However, the sons of the city of Basra arrested them. They [the two non-Iraqis] then fired at the people there and killed some of them. The two arrested persons are now at the Intelligence Department in Basra, and they were held by the National Guard force, but the British occupation forces are still surrounding this department in an attempt to absolve them of the crime.

And in yet another report from Syrian TV we read

[Al-Munajjid] In fact, Nidal, this incident gave answers to questions and suspicions that were lacking evidence about the participation of the occupation in some armed operations in Iraq. Many analysts and observers here had suspicions that the occupation was involved in some armed operations against civilians and places of worship and in the killing of scientists. But those were only suspicions that lacked proof. The proof came today through the arrest of the two British soldiers while they were planting explosives in one of the Basra streets. This proves, according to observers, that the occupation is not far from many operations that seek to sow sedition and maintain disorder, as this would give the occupation the justification to stay in Iraq for a longer period.

When viewed in the context of all the stories that have been circulating about the mythical ‘al-Zarqawi’ and the alleged role of al-Queda, the events in Basra are the first real evidence that we have of the role of occupation forces in destabilising Iraq through the use of agents provocateurs masquerading as ‘insurgents’.

And, as I have long alleged here, it is now almost certain that ‘al-Zarqawi’ is probably long dead. An AFP story tells us

[The] Imam of Baghdad’s al-Kazimeya mosque, Jawad al-Kalesi said, that “al-Zarqawi is dead but Washington continues to use him as a bogeyman to justify a prolonged military occupation…He’s simply an invention by the occupiers to divide the people.” Al-Kalesi added that al-Zarqawi was killed in the beginning of the war in the Kurdish north and that “His family in Jordan even held a ceremony after his death.”

And indeed, last year, in a piece I wrote about ‘al-Zarqawi’, I referred to a report about ‘al-Zarqawi’ being killed when the US flattened the ‘base’ of his group Ansar al-Islam in northern Iraq in early 2003, a report that actually originated with the US government.

Yet the BSBC, along with the rest of the Western media continues to put out endless reams of disinformation about ‘al-Zarqawi’ and his connection to the fictitious ‘al-Queda in Iraq’. Given the long-held assertion by the West that goes back to 2003, that Iraq was on the verge of ‘civil war’, it’s instructive to note that as the military situation of the occupation forces has deteriorated, so too has the level of so-called al-Queda operations increased, in a transparent attempt to divide the Iraqi national resistance, thus the increasing stories about impending civil war and the wave of ‘suicide’ bombings.

The exposure of the undercover SAS operations will only add to the resolve of Iraqi resistance forces to step up their campaign to expel the occupiers regardless of what kind of blatant propaganda line the UK government puts out.

It furthermore exposes the untenable position of the Iraqi ‘government’ which is now being squeezed by both sides, thus we get contradictory positions from the Iraqi ‘government’, with one denying that the SAS operatives had been handed over to ‘Shiite militia’ and the other trying desperately to tread an almost invisible line between condemning the actions of the British government whilst blaming the actions of the Iraqi police in Basra on ‘insurgents’ who have ‘infiltrated’ the police force. Yet it is a fact that at best, perhaps only 25% of the Iraqi military can be relied upon to serve their colonial masters.

Continuing to call them insurgents is itself an admission that the majority of Iraqis are opposed to the occupation and indeed, the bulk of the fighting is being carried out by the Kurdish Peshmerga as Iraqi forces simply cannot be relied on. It’s a classic situation that the US and UK military top brass know only too well having ‘been there and done that’ before.

Thus the occupiers become more desperate to destabilise the situation and no doubt we’ll see more SAS and US provocations revealed over the coming weeks as the situation continues to deteriorate.

Top Democrats won't attend anti-war rally in Washington

BY STEVEN THOMMA

Knight Ridder Newspapers

WASHINGTON - (KRT) - As the anti-war movement arrives in Washington this weekend, many top Democrats are leaving.

Nationally known Democratic war critics, including Howard Dean, the chairman of the Democratic National Committee, and Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, Russell Feingold of Wisconsin and John Kerry of Massachusetts, won't attend what sponsors say will be a big anti-war rally Saturday in Washington.

The only Democratic officeholders who plan to address the rally are Reps. Cynthia McKinney of Georgia and John Conyers of Michigan.

Today's leading Democrats head a party divided over the war, and many leaders are wary of standing with anti-war activists, who represent much of the party's base. The divide between anti-war activists and Democratic leaders underscores a challenge the party faces in the 2006 congressional elections and beyond. Some activists say that Democrats such as Clinton and Kerry who criticize the war but refuse to demand a timetable for withdrawal are effectively supporting the status quo - and may not merit future support.

En route to Washington for the rally, anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan protested outside Clinton's New York office. "She knows that the war is a lie, but she is waiting for the right time to say it," Sheehan told about 500 cheering supporters. "You say it or you are losing your job."

Spokesmen for the Democrats who are skipping the anti-war event all said they had schedule conflicts. But some leading anti-war activists aren't buying it.

"There are a lot of people here who are wondering, where are the Democrats?" said Tom Andrews, a former Democratic House member from Maine who's now the national director of Win Without War, one of several groups that are organizing three days of protests against the war in Washington starting Saturday.

"The Democratic Party has an identity crisis on this issue. We need voices. We need leadership," Andrews said. "But fear is driving them."

The rally comes at a time when a growing number of Americans want a timetable for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq, a proposition that both President Bush and many leading Democrats reject.

A poll this week by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center found that 51 percent of Americans want to keep troops in Iraq until it's stabilized, but the ranks of those who want to set a timetable to withdraw have grown to 57 percent from 49 percent in July. (Evidently some people chose both answers.)

At the same time, a growing number of grassroots Democrats are dissatisfied with their party's leadership in Congress. The percentage of Democrats who are happy with their leaders dropped from 64 percent in May to 49 percent now, the Pew survey found.

Dean, who rallied anti-war activists with his fervent opposition to the war during his 2003-2004 presidential campaign, already was scheduled to spend the weekend meeting with the Congressional Black Caucus, spokesman Josh Earnest said.

"His views on the president's handling of the war in Iraq are well documented," Earnest said. The anti-war rally, he said, is "not something the party was involved with."

Kerry planned to be in his home state this weekend, a spokeswoman said. At Brown University on Monday, the senator ripped Bush's conduct of the war, saying the president should admit "countless" mistakes in the war and proclaiming that "real leadership stands up to special interests and sets the course for future generations."

Feingold was scheduled to be out of town, a spokesman said. Feingold is the only national Democrat weighing a 2008 presidential campaign who's endorsed setting a timetable to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq.

Clinton also didn't plan to attend, a spokesman said.

"Our job is to make them pay a price for continuing to support this war," said Bill Dobbs, a spokesman for United for Peace and Justice, another group that's organizing the anti-war weekend in Washington.

Sixty-six members of Congress have formed an "Out of Iraq Congressional Caucus" that wants either immediate withdrawal or a timetable to withdraw. None of the party's congressional leadership and none of the likely candidates for president are members.

Anti-war organizers said they expected 100,000 people Saturday. A rival group plans a rally Sunday in Washington to show support for the war.

---

© 2005, Knight Ridder/Tribune Information Services.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You see, we have no opposition party to vote against the war in the next congressional elections.  With democrates like these who choose not to attend, its time for a third party.  Hey what about the Greeeensss!! yah I said it the greens.  till the next time this is the psycosphere:).

 

 

The foundations for the "War on Terror" lie in the ruins of the World Trade Center. The official account of what occurred on 9/11 is full of inconsistencies, but the mainstream media does not seek explanations. This 9-14-2001 CNN explanation of the collapses demonstrates that absurdity is unquestioned - how can quarter mile high buildings be designed to collapse perfectly in the event of a disaster?

This page goes through some of many inconsistencies in the official story. Grab a cup of coffee and have a read - there are numerous audio and video files in the sub-pages which illustrate the points made. When you've gone through everything ask yourself why the mainstream media avoids these issues.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Who Told Giuliani the WTC was going to collapse? [Details]

Rudolph Giuliani, the police commissioner, the fire commissioner, and the head of emergency management were told that the World Trade Center was going to collapse. How was this known, and why was no-one else warned?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FEMA was in New York on September 10 [Details]

Pure coincidence?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There Were No 800ºC Infernos in the Twin Towers [Details]

We are told that the twin towers collapsed due to infernos initiated by the plane impacts, yet eyewitness testimony and firefighters broadcasts prove there were no infernos in the buildings, so why did the buildings collapse within minutes of the aircraft impacts?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Collapse of WTC 1: Madrid Exposes a Fundamental Flaw [Details]

The core of Madrid's Windsor Building withstood an 18+ hour 800ºC fire. WTC 1 collapsed in minutes even though its core was solid and received no significant heating. Why?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The 'Truss Theory': A Fantasy Concocted to Conceal a Demolition [Details]

We are told that the twin towers perimeter walls were connected to the inner core by weak trusses. We are also told that the truss connection bolts were weak. If that's the case then why didn't WTC 1 collapse when Flight 11 hit the building?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WTC 1: An Impossible Collapse [Details]

Two seconds of a WTC 1 collapse video graphically demonstrate the 'truss theory' is a fantasy.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Video cameras positioned atop the World Trade Center which were used to feed daily images to local television stations were inexplicably inoperative that morning. [WingTV]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Live video cameras on the WTC would have graphically registered the following...

• Abruptly, there was an ear-splitting noise. The south tower shook... [ASNE]
  
• Reports of a Ground Shake Preceding the Collapse of WTC 2
• Video Evidence of a Ground Level Explosion Prior to WTC 1's Collapse
• The probable cause of the above: thermite detonations in the basements of the buildings

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

9/11 Firefighters: Bombs and Explosions in the WTC  [Details]

"Tower two has had major explosion and what appears to be a complete collapse", "...those involved in the secondary explosion at tower 1, 'kay, I've got five patients...", "We have got numerous people covered in dust from the secondary explosion...", "We've got another explosion at the tower..."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"It [WTC 2] started exploding," said Ross Milanytch, 57, who works at nearby Chase Manhattan Bank. "It was about the 70th floor. And each second another floor exploded out for about eight floors, before the cloud obscured it all." [ASNE] "I saw small explosions on each floor." [Wing TV]
One eyewitness whose office is near the World Trade Center told AFP that he was standing among a crowd of people on Church Street, about two-and-a-half blocks from the South tower, when he saw "a number of brief light sources being emitted from inside the building between floors 10 and 15." He saw about six of these brief flashes, accompanied by "a crackling sound" before the tower collapsed. Each tower had six central support columns. [American Free Press]

“When we got to about 50 ft from the South Tower, we heard the most eerie sound that you would ever hear. A high-pitched noise and a popping noise made everyone stop. We all looked up. At the point, it all let go. The way I see it, it had to be the rivets. The building let go, there was an explosion and the whole top leaned toward us and started coming down." [september11.ceenews]

"...and then all of a sudden it started like... it sounded like gunfire... you know, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang and then all of a sudden three big explosions."

• WMV video download (231kB)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Larry Silverstein, WTC 7, and the 9/11 Demolition  [Details]

We are told that WTC 7 collapsed through fire, yet Larry Silverstein says the building was "pulled" (i.e. demolished). Videos of the collapse and other evidence shows that the building was indeed demolished. Evidence also shows that WTCs 1 & 2 came down in the exactly the same way.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The FEMA WTC Collapse Analysis Farce  [Details]

The BPAT investigation team received $600,000 in FEMA funding, a drop in the ocean compared to the $50 million set aside for the NASA investigation of the Columbia shuttle disaster. The BPAT team took more than 3 weeks to initiate an investigation of WTC debris meaning vital evidence was lost.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If the twin towers had remained standing on 9/11 (as they were supposed to) they would have been monuments to the inaction of the US government and military. These monuments would have rapidly become a huge embarrassment to many people, and would have required a costly demolition.
Incredibly these two quarter mile high buildings both suffered catastrophic structural failures and collapsed straight into their own footprints. The people who should have been red faced bankrupts as a result of 9/11 are now swimming in money and power thanks to the perfect collapse of the twin towers.

Think about it.

 

"When you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains--however improbable--must be the truth.”
-Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

Sometime the truth is stranger than fiction, and in the spirit of Voltaire history is sometimes nothing more than agreed upon lies.  Think of hitlers SS who burned down the Reichtag and blamed poland to galvanize public support to start his war.   Think of the the Gulf of Tonkin incident that accelerated and initiated the Vietnam war.   Think of the Lavon Affair in which Isreali secret services planned to blow up a Hotel and blame arabs.  Think of the romans who burned rome to blame christians, etc..etc.....  History is full of red false flag operations to manipulate the populations through fear to commit to wars that do not serve their interest.   Just think about it, Whouldn't you rather here a full 360 degree view of an event in order to make educated decisions?   Democracy can only work with a population that is informed in order to make decisions that will direct their contries.  Knowledge is power and ignorance is a blind driver at the wheel.  Until next time this is the psycosphere!!!!