August 12, 2002, I was alerted to the following news release.
the time was one of shock and some doubt as to its authenticity.
What followed after the reading of it was also very perplexing. And
now, years later, and in the context of events that have transpired
subsequent to that day – especially the so-called Patriot Act,
wire taps, etc. - it seems to be the time to again share the newswire,
as well as the subsequent experiences.
The following is the word for word release:
Bush OK's Summary Executions Of Some Designated As Terrorists
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - In a surprise move sure to raise outcries
from foreign governments, civil liberties groups and others,
The White House
today announced with little fanfare that effective immediately,
certain individuals whom President Bush or other high-level Administration
members have designated as terrorists are subject to summary execution
by either Homeland Security operatives, U.S. intelligence operatives,
and in some cases by U.S. military personnel.
The presidential directive applies to both U.S. and foreign citizens,
both within and outside the United States territory.
The White House gave notice of the new policy in as quiet a way
as possible, making the announcement late Sunday evening from Crawford,
Texas. The unprecedented move is thought certain to generate a
of protest from numerous quarters.
Citing national security considerations, Bush Administration spokespersons
have declined to comment on the new directive. In light of the
President's slippage in recent opinion polls, many political analysts
Administration will avoid making any further public references
to what is sure to be a very contentious and unpopular decision.
On that August day, I had just been to the Jeff Rense site. I had
read or skimmed all of the posted articles listed that I found
I surfed on to my favorite international news sources and began
the process of finding out what was going on in the world.
I had been reading international news sources for about 10 minutes
when my mailbox signaled that mail had arrived. I clicked my
way to the email and opened the newly arrived document. It was from
acquaintance with whom I communicated and exchanged links of
common interest. This newly arrived email contained a link back to an
article on Rense's site. I assumed that I had probably read the
I had just been there. But, to be sure, I clicked the link. No,
I had not read it. It was a Reuters release, but had an address
the ABC news web site. I checked the article listing of the Rense
sight and found it to be at the top of the list. Indeed, it had
added within the 10 minutes or so since I had left.
As mentioned, and as you can readily understand, I was shocked.
The title of the article, “Bush OK’s
Summary Executions Of Some Designated As Terrorists,” was enough to grab my attention
and center my focus. The content of this news release was earthshaking
and very disturbing.
Immediately, I wanted to verify the story because it was (almost)
unbelievable. Although the specific net address for the article
on the ABC sight
was given, no specific address for the article on the Reuters'
sight was listed. Wanting to get as close to the original source
I went directly to the Reuters sight to search for it. It wasn’t
I returned to the Rense sight, and used the link to ABC. The
address was there - the page had been created. But the page address
contained the following: "Sorry .. This content
is not available. We apologize for the inconvenience."
Soon thereafter, even the title was removed from the articles
list on the Rense site.
I emailed the Rense web master about the disappearance of the
story and asked if it was a false story, or was it a matter
of Big Brother
knocking at the door. Within an hour or so a reply was received
saying they were "looking into it." That was the
last communication received from the web master.
As near as I can figure, that article was released by Reuters,
posted by ABC, picked up by Rense, and then gone within a very
of time. I estimate that it was on Rense's site less than 45
minutes. Given that ABC had created the page for the item, and
that was now on the specific page address, it had been there.
Obviously, it had been on the Rense sight because that's where
I read it.
Neither the person who had alerted me to the story, or myself,
had saved a copy of this disturbing news release. I was dumbfounded
more than a little puzzled by the whole sequence of events.
Then, less than a week later, I received a link to a story
written by Edgar J. Steele. In his article, he referred to
story. I quickly emailed Mr. Steele and asked him if he had
a copy of
the August 12, 2002 release. I soon received a copy of it from
the comment, "The following article was put on the net at the
two sites listed below and were stripped the same day. Luckily someone
saw it before it was removed and posted it on another discussion group." Actually,
both of the addresses are the same. One is a link to the original
story at http://www.abcnews.go.com/wire/World/reuters200200811_493.html
I have contemplated the surrounding elements of this event
for some time. Was it false? Was it accidentally released?
for the testing of political waters? Was it an indication that
there is, indeed, a degree of censorship being employed in
the name of
National Security? Is the press sometimes made privy to information
administration (state) that it is not allowed to divulge -
if so, is not the press, or elements within it, simply an extension
Doesn't the "news" then become propaganda in varying
shades of gray?
Given the content of the story, it was difficult to give more
than dubious merit to this release at the time. It seemed far
and straight away at odds with the constitution and the values
we have struggled to maintain. It was just too akin to something
hear from a dictatorship in a third world country, or read about
some historical fascist state.
Today, however, in light of the changes and activities of this
administration, the news release takes on a very different
demeanor. Given the newly
established, constitution trashing Patriot Act II, wire taping
scandals, torture prisons, the building of “containment facilities” inside
the U.S. boarder, the use of color coded fear to win elections, government
agencies spying on US citizenry – even the library books checked
out, terrorist and no-fly lists, the training of mailmen to look for
devious behavior, etc. etc. etc – that news release doesn’t
appear that outlandish.
If I were to read that news release today, I would not be as
shocked as I was on August 12, 2002. Disturbed? Yes. Surprised?
In fact, I suspect …. I will predict …. That this
news will be released again. But next time, it will
The times, they are a change'n…. quickly