Want to See What Benito Busholini is doing to YOUR wallet?
Check out the National Debt Clock
Hit back button on browser to return to Newsmakers
"Fascism should rightly be called Corporatism as it is a merge of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
Picasso's "Guernica"
"Why of course the people don't want war ... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship ...Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger." --Hermann Goering, Nazi leader, at the Nuremberg Trials after World War II
"As we speak, I have a terrible sense of foreboding, because last weekend a stunning omen occurred in this country. Anyone who thinks symbolically had to be shocked by the explosion of the Columbia shuttle, disintegrating in the air and strewing its parts and human remains over Texas -- the president's home state! So many times in antiquity, the emperors of Persia or other proud empires went to the oracles to ask for advice about going to war. Roman generals summoned soothsayers to read the entrails before a battle. If there was ever a sign for a president and his administration to rethink what they're doing, this was it. I mean, no sooner had Bush announced that the war was "weeks, not months" away and gone off for a peaceful weekend at Camp David than this catastrophe occurred in the skies over Texas. " The Salon Interview: Camille Paglia
February 9, 2003
 Powell shows U.N. his crack cocaine vial.
Colin Powell's Political Suicide Note
Delivered "Live" to U.N. 2-5-03
Is He On Crack?
Bush-Powell Charts in Biwheel
 "The veracity of Colin Powell's report on Wednesday before the United Nations Security Council was dealt a serious blow when Britain's Channel 4 News broke a story that severely undermines the credibility of the intelligence Powell used to make his case to the UN.
"Powell's presentation relied in no small part upon an intelligence dossier prepared by the British Government entitled, "Iraq - Its Infrastructure of Concealment, Deception and Intimidation." That report plagiarized large swaths of an essay written in September of 2002 by a graduate student from California named Ibrahim al-Marashi. Al-Marashi's essay appeared in the September 2002 edition of a small journal, the Middle East Review of International Affairs."
by Willliam Rivers Pitt
Powell's Report
Ibrahim al-Marashi's essay
Oh, and this just in:
 "A SERIOUS rift has opened up between Prince Charles and the government because he is seen to be AGAINST a war on Iraq and AGAINST America.
"Whitehall also believes the prince is sympathetic to the view of his Arab friends that war on Saddam Hussein is a bid by the US to grab a stake in the Middle East's oil." News of the World
And this:
"US Angered Over Reported French-German Plan to Extend Iraq Inspections VOA News
08 Feb 2003, 21:10 UTC U.S. officials are furious at France and Germany for reportedly developing a new proposal to extend United Nations weapons inspections in Iraq, as trans-Atlantic tensions over how best to disarm Saddam Hussein continue to worsen.
"According to U.S. officials, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld asked German Defense Minister Peter Struck about the plan after German media outlined its proposals but was told Berlin was not ready to discuss the plan with Washington. A senior U.S. official later told reporters the French-German tactic was not the way to have a winning hand with Washington. "
Well, how dare the Europeans act unilaterally. How dare they not inform Rumsfeld, whose German relatives are embarassed by him?
What now of Colin Powell [no birth time known] whose progressed Sun at 19 Gemini conjoins Bush's natal Uranus, both of which are opposed by primitive, destructive Pluto?
Houses 5 and 11 take this opposition in Bush's natal chart, the houses associated with relationships with foreign dignitaries/ambassadors and the USA's Congress.
Sun opposite Pluto is a power struggle, a meltdown, the verbal (Gemini) manipulation of human fear -- the fear of annihilation (Pluto).
Powell's Mercury (17 Aries) is in T-square to his natal Pluto and Jupiter. He's a helluva power broker and was a helluva general. His T-Square takes on Bush's natal Saturn and the USA's Pluto thus pumping the genocidal ante through the use of words (Mercury) of War (Mars ruler).
Powell's progressed Mercury hits Caput Algol (26 Taurus) on April 8, 2003 and stays there until February 11, 2004. Caput Algol, associated with the beheadings of kings, the loss of power and prestige by "heads" of state, and defeat in battle, will trine the USA's death-star Pluto (27 Capricorn) and sextile its natal Mercury (24 Cancer). Is a trine good? In this case it only means that it becomes easier for the death-star to ... and, well, Mercury in the 8th house of the USA's chart is the message: genocide. war crimes. Our soldiers. Their people.
Powell will cry out for a stop to it all once transiting Mars makes it to Pisces and conjoins his natal Saturn. Mars stays in the sacrificial sign connected with the politics of lying, cheating, chemical weapons, biological weapons and nuclear sickeness for a full 6 months in 2003. By the time Powell's Saturn kicks in, it will be too late.
Not many people remember that Colin Powell is one of the army's own who wanted very badly to hide the truth of the genocide against innocent Vietnamese (the Mai Lai Massacre) from the people of the United States. Powell, and others, including Democrats were against signing onto the International War Crimes Tribunal headquartered in Germany in 2000. Naturally, the USA wants to commit war crimes but never be held accountable for them.
In this case, I foresee that war crimes charges will not be limited to Iraqi civilians. I suspect that once it is made known to the American people that our military STILL does not have the proper biohazard suits and masks to wear into battle in Iraq, that there may be several chairs saved at The Hague for Bush, Powell, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al.
The biwheel of Powell's chart with Bush's shows that the two men have divergent wills (Sun square Sun) and clash loudly (Powell Venus-Uranus square Bush Mercury Pluto). What is alarming, is the sextile between Bush's Neptune (5 Libra) and Powell's Mars (5 Sagittarius). Both are in the degree of the transiting Lunar nodes. The fate of the two may be linked to what I said previously: bio-chemical weapons launched by Saddam upon our soldiers who do NOT have the protection they need to meet battle. Mars and Neptune are also linked to atrocities such as those of the holocaust.
Saturn's entrance into Cancer June 4, 2003 will play havoc with Powell. First, Powell's Sun opposes the USA's Saturn at 14 Libra (Bush's Moon is at 16 Libra and conjoins USA Saturn and opposes Powell's Sun). Powell, Bush and USA's Sun/Saturn create a T-square in the Declaration of Independence's natal chart. The closer transiting Saturn comes to the USA's Sun (13 Cancer -- Bush's Sun) the T-square set up will drag in Colin Powell, once the only sane voice in this administration.
The USA used to have two parties: Republican and Democrat. However, it is time that we face squarely the fact that neither exists anymore. Both parties have been pre-empted by the ONE party that now governs the United States: the Right Wing neocons ensconsed in the Pentagon.
A cursory reading of Andrew J. Bacevich's "American Empire," and Gore Vidal's "Dreaming War, Blood for Oil and the Cheney-Bush Junta" more than substantiate the points I'm making.
The issue here is not whether the media is liberal or conservative, for Christ's sake, it is that the media is merely the corporate/fascist arm of the ONE PARTY SYSTEM now in power in the United States. This is what the American people refuse to wake up to. It is the thing that critics of Starcats excoriate me for with emailed messages calling me "whining poodle," "barking dog," "silly liberal," and the like. It isn't whether I like Republicans or not, or whether I trust Tom Daschle or not. I repeat, both parties are DEAD. There is no American Democracy.
Pluto in Sagittarius, the USA's first house of the people and the nation's identity, continues to dig up the maggots eating at America's dead carcus.
Still the people don't get it.
America is financially and morally bankrupt.
Still the arguments continue over whether or not you're patriotic if you oppose Bush. Whether or not the media is liberal or conservative. Whether or not the Democrats have a message. Whether or not the Republican Party can be both compassionate and conservative at the same time. It is all bullshit.
There is only one, and that "one" is Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld, the axis of America's degeneration into evil.
Oh, Powell, will "get it," all right. About the time the American people do. But by then it will be too late.
Patriot Act II -2003 is on the table. The expanded powers the government wants while maintaining an iron curtain of secrecy in front of itself can only be compared to the regimes of Hitler and Mussolini. Yet no one is "getting it." It's either a whole lot of burning candles and chanting new age prayers or waiting for the Democrats to pull out the deus ex machina and save the masses. It's not going to happen unless America wakes up and sees what it has already forfeited.
Iraq is Bush's Poland.
The truth is out there....Hello! Hello! Is anybody listening?
"On the day following the fire [Hitler allegedly set fire to the Reichstag after being appointed Chancellor of Germany], February 28, he prevailed on President Hindenburg to sign a decree "for the Protection of the People and the State" ...":
"Restrictions on personal liberty, on the right of free expression of opinion, including freedom of the press; on the rights of assembly and association; and violations of the privacy of postal, telegrahpic and telephonic communications; and warrants for house searchers, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed." [Hitler]
"The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich," William L. Shirer, pg. 194, Touchstone Books, a division of Simon & Schuster."
America No Longer
Patriot Act II was ONLY shown to Hastert, Speaker of the House and Veep Cheney. Congress had no idea that Bush planned to ram this through after invasion of Iraq READ THE LEAKED DOCUMENTS
MOYERS: Chuck Lewis, whom you just saw in that piece is with me now. He is the Executive Director of the nonpartisan Center for Public Integrity, the organization responsible for obtaining that document. Chuck Lewis, thank you for joining us.
LEWIS: Thank you.
MOYERS: The Patriot Act was passed six weeks after 9/11. We know now that it greatly changed the balance between liberty and security in this nation's framework. What do you think — what's the significance of this new document, called the Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003?
LEWIS: I think the significance is it just deepens and broadens, further extends the first Patriot Act. That act in 2001, they had six weeks, which was not a lot of time to throw something together. Now there's been 18 months of all kinds of things that have happened and court decisions that have tried to roll back some of the Patriot Act.
And other concerns, law enforcement, people have, and so they've had time to sift and sort what they want. And it's arguably might be a more thorough rendering of all the things law enforcement and intelligence agencies would like to have in a perfect world. It's sort of how I look at it, and I think it's a very tough document when it comes to secrecy and surveillance.
I understand the concerns about fear of terrorism. And it certainly…
MOYERS: We all have those…
LEWIS: We all have those and there are things in the legislation that make sense, and that are reasonable, I think for any American. But there are other things that really take some of the Patriot Act civil liberties issues that folks were concerned about and go even further. And I think it's gonna be very controversial. Some of these sections are gonna be debated for weeks and months.
MOYERS: So many of these powers latent in this draft legislation were powers that were taken away from the intelligence community some years ago because they were abused.
LEWIS: That's right.
MOYERS: Do you see any protection in here against potential abuse?
LEWIS: I don't think there's very much — there's a lot more authority and power for government. There's less oversight and information about what government is doing. That's the headline and that's the theme. And the safeguards seem to be pretty minimal to me.
MOYERS: I just go through here, you know? "Will give the Attorney General the unchecked power to deport any foreigner?"
LEWIS: Right.
MOYERS: Including lawful permanent resident aliens. It would give the government the power to keep certain arrests secret until an indictment is found never in our history have we permitted secret arrests. It would give the government power to bypass courts and grand juries in order to conduct surveillance without a judge's permission. I mean these do really further upend the balance between liberty on the one hand and security on the other.
LEWIS: Well, they do. They reduce judicial oversight with the secret intelligence courts instead of saying the court may do this now it's the court will do this. They can have ex parte conversations where they go into the judge without anyone else around. In terms of information about detainees, not only can they detain anyone they'd like to detain, there is no public information about it.
Journalists cannot find out the names of — we detained over a thousand people after September 11th because we thought they might all be terrorists. Not one of them was really found with any criminal charges to be a terrorist. And we don't know the names of almost all those people, still. And so it does appear that everything that folks might be concerned about with the Patriot Act, this is times five or times ten is what I look at it. I see it very serious.
MOYERS: You and I have had this kind of discussion often, we go back a long way together. The foundation that I serve on has been a big supporter of yours and you've been a big supporter of our journalism. If we were fighting terrorists instead of being journalists, wouldn't we want this kind of power in our hands?
LEWIS: Well, we would, but we operate in a democracy and there's other considerations. I mean I think, you know, there's no question, if you're in law enforcement, this is gonna make it easier for you to do your job. The problem is, we have a history in our country, just in our lifetime, in the last quarter century.
Where we've seen FBI and CIA abuses of ordinary citizens. Where mail has been opened, where homes have been broken into. Where infiltration has occurred in political groups. Informants have been used, misused. People's lives have been ruined. People have committed suicide because of the pressures brought against them by the government, by these kinds of secret intelligence agencies.
This is not a completely crazy idea to worry about the power of the government. And it was curbed and rolled back in the '70s. And there is something obviously occurring here in the public space around the whole issue of liberty and security right now.
And it is clearly changing and it's moving towards security. And the question for us as a people is what is the right balance. And I think my biggest personal concern is that there ought to be a debate about this. So the Patriot Act jammed through Congress in six weeks.
There was a Congressional — there was a Senate hearing that lasted an hour and a half, there were no questions to the Attorney General by the senators. This is too important for our country. Whatever anyone's point of view, this should be a conversation that the country should have.
And if I'm afraid they're waiting for a war or something and then they're gonna pop this baby out and then try to jam it through.
MOYERS: You mean that if it were not rolled out and discussed publicly until the United States has had war in Iraq, people might not pay as much attention to it as they would now.
LEWIS: They wouldn't pay as much attention and you know, our worries and our fears are gonna be different than they are now. And there will be less of — all these things will melt away. These are nice concerns about liberties but we'll be at war. And we'll have presidents and attorneys general and other government officials telling us things. And I just see a — I see that it wouldn't work quite as easily for them if it comes out in the next few weeks as opposed to then.
MOYERS: Congressman Burton, Dan Burton, of Indiana, a very conservative congressman, who is Chairman on the Committee on Government Reform. He said recently, "An iron veil is descending over the executive branch."
Now your forte is moving information around in Washington trying to find out what's going on. Would you agree with what Congressman Burton has said here?
LEWIS: I absolutely agree with what he's saying. I mean there have been 300 roll-backs of the Freedom of Information Act since September 11th. All over America, at the state and local level, as well as the federal government. The Attorney General sent a message to every federal employee, when in doubt, deny any Freedom of Information request.
We have other things like presidential papers being sealed off. We have reporters trying to cover things in Afghanistan being locked in a warehouse and not able to file their stories. Even before September 11th, we had one reporter's home phone records seized by a grand jury without telling him or his news organization.
There's a lot of things happening with information, access to information, and efforts to stop journalism that I have not seen in 20 plus years of watching Washington and journalism and government interact. And it's not just information. It's not information for information's sake. This is about health, safety, lives…
MOYERS: What do you mean?
LEWIS: Well, you have this whole thing in this current draft legislation that there's a worst case scenario type requirement that every company that is making hazardous or toxic materials has to make that information available to the public. So if something terrible does happen they know that it's possible that it could happen and there's some sort of assessment about it. Well now that is not gonna be required. Chemical companies will not have to tell the world about these problems.
And they will — the citizens in that community will not have access to that information in an easy accessible way. And that's new and that affects their life. If some problem occurs, they're unrelated to the terrorism. Something just goes wrong, they will not know anything about that in their community.
So we're rolling back health and safety and environmental and other considerations and sensitivities that have been in our culture now for decades. Are melting away because of — all in the name of fighting terrorism.
MOYERS: What would be the Attorney General's justification for wanting to restrict access to information about toxic chemicals?
LEWIS: Well, the — I haven't heard one. But I think the rationale is that terrorists could get information about a chemical plant and its security, bad security, inadequate security and somehow then bring about a threat.
But the problem is sunlight is the best disinfectant. If these plants have bad security or they're not being well run and they're actually unsafe it's usually exposing it and talking about it and the public being aware of it that ends up improving the plant or the facility or whatever it is.
I actually find that that's how change occurs usually. And so the ostensible rationale is to keep it away from terrorists. But I think it's also a rationale to protect companies frankly in this instance. Well I happen to know that's been the chemical lobbyist's dream for a long time.
A long time before 9/11. They did not want this information made available.
LEWIS: I see a lot of opportunism here around the fear and paranoia in the wake of September 11th. And taking advantage of the insecurity that we all feel today. And that is, to me, incredibly offensive. And that's why a conversation about it, there's 40 sections in this thing. The public needs to have a sense what exactly are we getting here. There needs to be a chewing over. This should not jam through Congress. This should be out there and being — be talked about.
I mean the realm between public and private, between foreign and domestic, all these things have morphed into the citizen against all of this out there — this morass of regulations and rules and intrusions. And at the same time they can come after you, get your credit card data, your library records, your Internet searching, everything. And they'll decide whether or not you're a suspect or not.
Whether or not they like you. If you're a disfavored political group, or from the wrong ethnic background, then you might become on the radar screen of some folks that you don't know about, you can't find out about, and they can do things. They have — this is incredible power.
MOYERS: One of the provisions in here as I understand it is that the government could actually strip citizenship from someone if — for example, if you were found, according to this, if you were found making what you thought was a legitimate contribution to some non profit organization.
LEWIS: Right.
MOYERS: Foundation. And months from then, that foundation were deemed by the government or that organization were deemed by the government to have been in some way supporting terrorists, you could lose your citizenship because of your contribution, even if you didn't know…
LEWIS: That's right.
MOYERS: That you were contributing to an organization like that.
LEWIS: No, that's absolutely — they have that power. They can also extradite all over world, even if we don't have treaties. I mean, some of the things in here are — strain credulity for legal scholars. They're not sure, they've never seen these kinds of provisions trotted out. I mean, a lot of the question is if it does pass Congress, what would the courts do with it later.
I mean I think there are some legitimate issues there.
MOYERS: What do you make of this? This is the document that went from the Department of Justice with this draft legislation to certain very key people in government. Among them, Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert and Vice President, Richard Cheney, for their comments on this obviously confidential document.
Why the Speaker of the House and the Vice President and not the committee chairman of the Judiciary Committee in the Senate or the appropriate committee in the House?
LEWIS: It's a way to say you've consulted Congress to some extent by sending it to the Speaker and not really consulting Congress.
As far as I can tell, and we have not polled every member or anything like that, but it appears that virtually no one on Capitol Hill, except for the Speaker, has seen this legislation. I'm talking about the people at the judiciary committees in the House and Senate don't have this legislation. And have even been kind of yanked around a little bit for months about whether there will even be legislation.
MOYERS: The House Judiciary Committee actually asked the FBI a few months ago how it has used the new powers that had been given to it under the Patriot Act. And the Justice department said, "We can't tell you that information, it's classified."
And this prompted then-Congressman then Bob Barr, from Georgia, another conservative, by the way, he said the attitude of the Justice Department seems to be that even Congress isn't entitled to know how they are using the authority that Congress gave them.
LEWIS: It's incredible. I mean, if Congress doesn't have oversight over the Justice Department and these programs, who does? That's how it's supposed to work in our constitution and in our set up for government.
MOYERS: That's one of your real concerns, isn't it? That there's no oversight when secrecy is this tight.
LEWIS: Absolutely. The Congress is the people's chance to monitor the executive branch. That is the only… it is the closest branch of government to the people. The House members are up for election every two years. If the House of Representatives and the Congress in general cannot keep a watch on the executive branch and cannot be informed about their activities. There's something very serious here.
MOYERS: Chuck, I hear people out there in the audience thinking, you know, I'm scared. We're — this is a new ballgame, to put it trivially. War on terrorists, they came on 9/11, we keep getting reports they're coming again, who knows where it'll happen. Everybody's scared.
You guys are living in Lotus Land, you journalists talking about this sort of thing. Because we really want the government to protect us from another World Trade Center attack on the Pentagon, which is not far from where your office is in Washington.
LEWIS: Right.
MOYERS: What about that?
LEWIS: Look, I wanna be protected by the government as much as anyone.
But actually, in some ways that's beside the point. There are also freedoms and rights and liberties that, you know, millions of Americas have fought for over 200 years to make sure that this is a special kind of country. And isn't it possible that to be secure and have liberties?
Why give all the power and authority and have no oversight and accountability. What are the safeguards. And that's the question.
MOYERS: When someone inside government, inside the Justice Department, presumably, gives you a confidential document marked, "Not For Distribution," The Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003, knowing that this administration has been cracking down on watchdogs and leaks from inside government, do you consider this person a patriot?
LEWIS: I really do. I think it takes incredible guts to take something that bothers someone, and for whatever reason, they feel they must give it out. And they know they're gonna be polygraphed, they're gonna be questioned. There's gonna be a clampdown found, there's gonna be a witch-hunt after this occurs. They could very likely not only lose their job but-- maybe worse.
MOYERS: Be sued by the government?
LEWIS: Be sued by the government and otherwise ruined professionally. That is the most incredible kind of courage. And I have an incredible respect for anyone who does that.
MOYERS: I should make this clear this is not marked "Top Secret" — this is not a classified document. It is stamped "Confidential" but nobody is betraying the Secrets Act.
LEWIS: Yeah, that's right, I mean, I've — I'm glad to say that that's right.
MOYERS: There was a story this week in Congressional Quarterly, which is a very respected non-partisan journal in Washington. It says "Pentagon's proposed changes strike some as difficult, dangerous and destabilizing." And one of the things Donald Rumsfeld wants is wavers of environmental laws so that troops can conduct more "realistic exercises."
And then this magazine, which is non-partisan, says this is part of the administration's broad campaign to run the federal government more like a private business. And with private businesses you have more control over employees, you have more control over information. Do you see that developing as a syndrome of this administration?
LEWIS: I think it's incredible what's happening. I see a wholesale assault on access to information in this country that has not really been seen, I have to just say it, since Richard Nixon.
When you look at the roll-backs of freedom of information, when you look at things like meeting with energy companies with the Vice President. It's simple things though in government property with government officials getting paid by taxpayer money and it's not available to the public.
When you see some of the things that we have talked about earlier with reporters from detainees to military actions not being able to see things. I see a lot of very aggressive behavior by government officials towards the act of getting information out and information itself. I think that we're in a very unusual situation right now. And it really worries me actually.
MOYERS: Chuck Lewis, Center for Public Integrity, thank you very much.
LEWIS: Thank you.
February 9, 2003 -- Starcats.
Keep Track of Bush!
Tom Hayden Politics of Peace and Articles
Arianna Huffington Columns
Bush Watch
Truth Out
Buzzflash
2/9/03 Updated Bush Time Table
-
January 27, 2003 Hans Blix delivers U.N. Weapons Inspection Report to United Nations.
- January 28, 2003, G.W. Bush gives State of the Union Address, 9:00 pm, EST, Washington, DC.
- January 28, 2003, Israel holds elections for Prime Minister. Polls open at 1:00 am and close at 1:00 PM 1/28 in the capital, Tel Aviv.
- January 31, 2003, G.W. Bush meets with British PM Tony Blair in Washington, DC
- February 1, 2003, New Moon at 12 degrees of "New World Order" Aquarius conjunct deceiving Neptune opposite Jupiter of exaggerations and hubris.
- Space Shuttle Columbia crashes over Palestine/Nacogdoches, Texas
- February 4, 2003, Memorial Service for Crew of Columbia
- February 5, 2003, Colin Powell presents evidence of WMD held by Iraq before United Nations Security Council
- February 9-14, 2003, Hajj. Pilgrams make annual journey to Holy Site in Mecca, Saudi Arabia.
- February 11, 2003, Mercury at 28 Capricorn coming out of shadow, or the degree at which it turned retrograde on January 2, 2003. Mercury to "New World Order" Aquarius on February 23, 2003.
- February 11 through 16, 2003, hard aspects which include Moon-Mars; Moon-Pluto; Moon-Saturn. It is the Moon that gets hurt, as witnessed in charts for the Columbia crash and Challenger. February 16's Full Moon: Mars conjunct Pluto adn Moon opposite Uranus. followed on the 18th by Moon square Pluto; Moon square Mars; Moon square Saturn. Sun enters Pisces and hits the Uranus-to-Pisces point of March 10, 2003.
- February 15, 2003, Worldwide Antiwar protests. Tony Blair in Glasgow, Scotland to speak at Labor Party's Spring Conference.
- February 16, 2003, Full Moon at 27 Aquarius/27 Leo -- "King of the One World Government." Aquarius Sun conjunct Revolutionary "Off With Their Heads" Uranus; Sun-Uranus opposite Common People Moon. "I have the right to do what I want when I want" Jupiter Retrograde at 11 Leo is in exact opposition to "confuse them" Neptune.
Note: From February 16 to March 2. Full moon wanes to dark (new Moon). Expect Bush to launch pre-emptive strike on Iraq about this time. Other estimates take us to a mid-March attack, but March 18, 2003 is a Full Moon at 27 Virgo/Pisces. Military advantage rests upon an increased number of days to attack while the Moon is dark. Therefore, I think that Bush gives the order earlier rather than later.
- Jupiter-Neptune, of extreme politico-religious fundamentalism falls across G.W. Bush's 1/7 house axis. Saturn, "the chief executive/executive decisions," at 22 Gemini (talks out of both sides of his mouth) is retrograde and opposite "by any means necessary" Pluto which conjoins bloody, warmongering Mars at 19 Sagittarius. Pluto and Mars conjoin G.W. Bush Inauguration Moon at 19 Sagittarius in the 8th house of death and destruction in that chart, and both square progressed Inauguration Venus of diplomacy at 19 degrees of sacrificial Pisces.
- March 2, 2003: New Moon at 12 Pisces.
- March 4, 2003, Mercury conjunct Uranus at 29 Aquarius, 4:10:03 pm, EST, Washington, DC. Sun 13 Pisces square G.W. Bush Inauguration 8th house Pluto at 14 Sagittarius.
- March 10, 2003, Uranus enters Pisces and remains in mutual reception with Neptune until 2011. This marks the 84 year return of Uranus to the position it held when the Nazi Party was officially formed in Munich, Germany.
February 24, 1920, 7:20 PM, CET -1:00, Munich, Germany, 28N08, 011E34, Ascendant, 24 Virgo. Urnuas 01 Pisces 51. Neptune 09 Leo.
Uranus in Pisces:
1668-1676, in mutual reception with Neptune in Aquarius
1752-1760, Neptune in Leo
1835-1844, Mutual reception with Neptune in Aquarius
1919-1928, Neptune in Leo. This is the Neptune position for Mussolini's Founding of Fascism in Italy, March 23, 1919, 12:00 pm (no time known) Rome, Italy. Neptune was on the USA's North Node in its 8th house. WW I saw the use of Mustard Gas by the Germans as a chemical weapon. It marks the advent of prohibition, bathtub gin, the roaring 20's, and women getting the right to vote, and the formation of the Nazi Party.
By 1933, after the burning of the Reichstag, The Third Reich was formed: Jan 30, 1933, 11:15 AM CET-1:00, Berlin, Germany, 52N30, 013E22, Ascendant, 25 Taurus. [Uranus at 19 Aries]. "Inflatus:" South Node, Neptune, Mars and Jupiter all conjunct in "Purity of the Vision of the Master Race = Virgo." Mercury, ruler of the Virgo stellium, is in Aquarius conjoined to scientific Saturn (horrible medical experiments) and "New World Order" Sun.
Daddy Bush used the term "New World Order" during his presidency. He got it from Hitler, who was the first to use the term. Daddy Bush was also secretly involved in eugenics in the United States -- the forced sterilzation of countless people of color in North and South Carolina and in the State of Oregon. This is what the organization, "Planned Parenthood," was originally created as the "front" for.
BTW, IBM created the computer database of every name of every jew in Germany for Hitler. Bayer Aspirin helped I.G. Farben make the gas cannisters for the concentration camp showers. That's the soul of American capitalism for you! Helping bidness worldwide!
- June 10, 2003, Saturn to Cancer
- June 20, 2003, Saturn in Cancer trine Uranus in Pisces, exact on June 24, 2003. Saturn and Uranus trine again on April 4, 2004, but the closest the trine gets is within a 1 degree 52 minute orb.
- August 27, 2003, Jupiter to Virgo for a 12 month stay.
February 9, 2003 -- Starcats
Newsmakers 2003 Archives
January 1, 2003 Happy New Year and Welcome to the World of the Weird: Bush & Saddam; January 2003's Lunations
January 18, 2003 Full Moon 1/18/03 and TIMELINE
January 25-27, 2003 Hans Blix Reports to U.N. and Bush's State of the Union Address
All Under One Roof!
Newsmakers: 2002 Archives
|
Home