I include 2 related stories here, related between themselves and to the great actions taken today
The first is of further revelations of inconsistencies and contradictions in the official tale of the DC snipers now safely inside-
In other words, the official line's a right load of old tosh
From the same team that brought us 911 and the Bali micro-nuke?
The m.o.seems to be to insert so many contradictions into the tale,
that once it is just slightly unravelled by the dissenter, the whole
thing becomes an obvious and deliberately perpetrated fraud.
Then sit back and almost wet themselves when the majority believe
the tale

 http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr20.html

Two unlikely suspects have been selected to play the roles of the
feared DC snipers: John Allen Muhammad, commonly described as a 41-
year-old 'drifter,' though until fairly recently he had spent his
entire adult life in the military; and a 17-year-old Jamaican
immigrant named Lee Boyd Malvo (also identified as Lee Byron Malvo
and John Lee Malvo), who entered the country illegally several years
ago.

The pair allegedly conducted their killing spree by utilizing what
police have described as a car that had been modified to create a
mobile sniper's nest. There are, alas, numerous problems with this
scenario. And there is certainly no shortage of weirdness surrounding
the alleged exploits of the pair.

Consider the following:

Muhammad's ex-wife, with whom he has had a stormy relationship marked
by bitter custody battles, recently relocated to the DC area to take
a job at, of all places, John Ashcroft's Justice Department. This
peculiar fact, though reported by the British press, has been
curiously absent in the blanket coverage of the case by the American
media. ( http://www.observer.co.uk/focus/story/0,6903,820087,00.html)
Two years ago, Muhammad kidnapped his own children, in clear
violation of a court order, and took them out of the country for an
extended period of time. There is no indication that he was charged
with any crime in connection with these actions, nor for repeatedly
threatening his former wife.
That same former wife charged Muhammad, in court documents, with
tapping her phone line. No indication has been given as to how
Muhammad acquired the skills and equipment to do this.
( http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/la-na-
sniper25oct25004444.story)
The rifle allegedly used in the shootings was purchased in June from
a Tacoma, Washington-based dealer operating under the name "Bull's
Eye Shooter Supply." The shop, located near the Army's Ft. Lewis
base, is owned by a former U.S. Army sniper instructor. Muhammad
completed his lengthy tour of duty at Ft. Lewis, which has, curiously
enough, a sniper training program.
( http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-
profile26oct26.story)
But wait ... according to investigator/writer Jon Rappoport's
newsletters, the Bushmaster rifle that authorities first tried to
connect to Muhammad was actually purchased by him from a different
Tacoma gun dealer known as "Welcher's Gun Shop." The problem is,
apparently, that Muhammad subsequently sold that gun back to
Welcher's, who then sold it to another customer, who still has the
gun in Tacoma. Rappoport claims that these transactions were
confirmed by Welcher's employees. In order then to put another
Bushmaster in Muhammad's hands, it was claimed that he had, after
selling back the first rifle, purchased an identical one from Bull's
Eye. If Rappoport's information is correct, and taking into
consideration the ownership of Bull's Eye, it is conceivable that the
second rifle purchase was fabricated after the fact.
Though Muhammad is generally portrayed by the media as a chronically
unemployed drifter who stayed at homeless shelters, he doesn't appear
to have had problems with money. Consider all of the following facts
which have emerged in various press accounts:
Before kidnapping his children, Muhammad was ordered to pay nearly
$900 per month in child support ($869, by one account), indicating
that the court had reason to believe that he had a fairly substantial
income at the time.
He has reportedly owned, or co-owned, several businesses, including a
karate school, an auto repair shop, and something called, strangely
enough, "Reality Enterprises."
( http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/la-na-
profile25oct25004444.story)
A number of witnesses have commented on the incongruity of an
allegedly homeless man who always had money to spend. The L.A. Times
reported that a former girlfriend told her family that
Muhammad's "story didn't make any sense ... He was a hard-luck
drifter with money, a man who could pick up and fly to the Caribbean
whenever he got the inclination." The same Times report added
that "She wasn't the only one asking questions ... The director of
the shelter has said [of Muhammad] ... 'He was rather secretive about
his past and present ... He was closed-mouthed. He didn't have a
visible source of income, but he was able to travel at a moment's
notice.'" ( http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-na-
killers27oct27.story) The Independent Online noted that with "no
apparent means of support, Muhammad and companion John Lee Malvo
traveled from the Caribbean to the north-western United States, and
points in between, over the past year and a half. How they financed
their activities remains a mystery." The man who runs the homeless
mission where Muhammad last stayed in Washington state, Reverend Alan
Archer, was reportedly "amazed to see Muhammad getting phone calls
from a travel agent." Archer recalled that Muhammad flew off on ski
trips to both Denver and Salt Lake City.
( http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?
click_id=79&art_id=qw1035806221674B225&set_id=1)
While living in Antigua, with no visible means of support, Muhammad
nevertheless was able to send his three children to an exclusive
private school. ( http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?
click_id=79&art_id=qw1035806221674B225&set_id=1)
Two years ago, Muhammad, an American citizen born and raised in
Louisiana, obtained an Antiguan passport -- allegedly by lying about
who his mother was. Why he would be taken at his word and not
required to show proof of Antiguan citizenship has not been
explained. ( http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-
profile26oct26.story) Also unexplained is why he was issued the
passport in July 2000, although the Antiguan government claims that
its records don't show Muhammad entering the country until May of
2001. ( http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?
click_id=79&art_id=qw1035806221674B225&set_id=1) Was Muhammad
traveling on that passport between July of 2000 and May of 2001? And
if so, to where?
Initial reports speculated that Muhammad had received sniper
training. The Army has subsequently denied this. Most reports now
hold that Muhammad, throughout what the Times described as
a "checkered, 16-year military career," never distinguished himself
as a skilled shooter. ( http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/la-na-
profile25oct25004444.story) As the Times explained: "All soldiers
entering the Army undergo basic training with M-16 rifles. Once every
year, they have to requalify, earning 'marksman,' 'sharpshooter'
or 'expert' marks. Muhammad ultimately earned only a sharpshooter
mark, so to compare him to a military sniper would be inaccurate."
( http://www.calendarlive.com/printedition/calendar/cl-et-
roug26oct26.story) Indeed it would. To even be considered for
admission to the Army's sniper schools reportedly requires three
consecutive 'expert' rankings. Muhammad could not even manage one
such score over the course of sixteen years. He could though, rather
amazingly, score head shots on live targets from up to 500 yards
away, even while firing from inside a cramped car trunk with limited
visibility. Imagine that.
But did Muhammad have more training than what is officially
acknowledged? He frequently claimed that he had. Was this just
baseless boasting?
The WSWS reported that "various sources indicate that Muhammad liked
to boast about his service in the army and claimed to be working for
the CIA and FBI." While applying at a government office on Antigua,
he "claimed to have attended 'Special Forces/ Sniper School' in the
US military and to have 'taught urban warfare.'" In the summer of
2002, Muhammad told a nephew in Baton Rouge "a dubious story about
working for the Central Intelligence Agency."
( http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/oct2002/snip-o28.shtml)
Muhammad further claimed that Malvo was also a highly trained
operative, recruited for his ability to infiltrate the youth culture.
( http://www.msnbc.com/news/825625.asp?pne=msn&cp1=1#BODY)
The Guardian reported that Muhammad "appears to have told friends"
that he had received training as a sniper and had served in Special
Forces.
( http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,819054,00.html)
Muhammad's former business partner in the karate school also recalled
being told that his partner had served in Special Forces.
( http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,819695,00.html)
Muhammad's alleged accomplice, just seventeen years old and with no
formal firearms training, is claimed to have been the gunman in some
of the sniper shootings. Reports claim that Muhammad trained Malvo in
the use of firearms by taking target practice on a tree stump in the
backyard of a Tacoma home -- as though hitting a large tree stump
from across a backyard is equivalent to hitting a human target from
hundreds of yards away, from an awkward position within a car trunk.
According to published reports, neither of the two had ever lived in
the Washington, DC area. The pair arrived there just prior to the
time that the shootings started. Strangely though, they had a
thorough enough knowledge of the area to locate strategic sites from
which to shoot, and to map out escape routes that enabled them to
evade capture.
The car, a 1990 blue Chevrolet Caprice acquired just before the
shooting spree began, is a former police cruiser that was purchased
from a New Jersey auto dealership named (and this, I have to say, is
a nice touch) "Sure Shot Autos."
( http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/la-na-
sniper25oct25004444.story)
I should probably add here that a blue Chevy Caprice bears strikingly
little resemblance to a white van or box truck.
And I should probably also add here that the nation was witness to
some of the most brilliant police work in recent memory when someone
saw fit to release a "composite sketch" of a featureless, white box
truck, and have it plastered all over the nation's television
screens. Could anything have possibly been more counterproductive?
You can imagine the calls flooding into the hotline: "Yeah, I think I
counted 27 of them sniper trucks today."
Just hours before the suspects were arrested, Chief Charles Moose -
who has become a fixture on cable and network newscasts - issued via
national television what appeared for all the world to be a post-
hypnotic, 'triggering' cue. As the Guardian described it: "Hours
before the arrest yesterday morning of the two men now believed to be
responsible for the string of murders around Washington, the
Montgomery county police chief, Charles Moose, made his strangest
communication with the then-unknown suspects. Swallowing hard, he
began to read from a prepared statement. 'You indicated that you want
us to do and say certain things,' he said, as mystified reporters
looked on. 'You asked us to say, quote: 'We have caught the sniper
like a duck in a noose.' We understand that hearing us say that is
important to you.' Investigators offered no illumination of the
reference, even after John Allen Muhammad and Lee Malvo were taken
into custody yesterday."
( http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,818958,00.html)
Just hours later, the suddenly known suspects were found sleeping
soundly, and were promptly taken into custody without offering any
resistance. They were only a few miles from both the first and last
shooting scenes. That final surreal announcement followed a series of
increasingly bizarre, cryptic communications by Moose to the
purported snipers.
At one point, Moose pleaded with the suspects to call police on the
phone number that had supposedly been left behind in a message from
the sniper. No one in the media bothered to ask why, if the number
was in fact left by the sniper, the police were now imploring the
suspect to call them on that number. Did the sniper leave the police
their own phone number, just in case they might have forgotten it?
Prior to last year, John Allen Muhammad was known as John Allen
Williams. He changed his name just in time, it appears, for the media
to be able to portray him as some sort of Islamic fundamentalist.
Eleven years ago though, Williams served in the Gulf War,
demonstrating that he apparently had no reservations about
participating in a brutal assault upon a predominantly Islamic
nation.
( http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,819054,00.html)
Muhammad has been described by various witnesses as an extremely
controlling man who exerted an extraordinary amount of influence over
his young accomplice. Their relationship has been described as "drill
sergeant/recruit."
( http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,819695,00.html)
Some reports claim that the pair first met in Antigua, while others
suggest that they first teamed up in Tacoma. No reports have offered
much insight into how or why this odd couple became partners.
Muhammad was not at first booked on murder charges, but on charges of
harassing his ex-wife two years ago -- thereby illustrating that
police did indeed have enough evidence to charge Muhammad with crimes
for the actions that he had taken against his ex-wife, but had
previously chosen not to do so.
As previously noted, Malvo entered the United States illegally. Not
long before the sniper killings began, he was detained by the INS,
who were aware of his status as an illegal immigrant. Strangely
though, he was subsequently released. Under normal circumstances,
Malvo would have been deported and John Muhammad would have been
incarcerated before the sniper shootings even began.
It is asserted by the police that someone claiming to be the sniper
told them in a telephone conversation that they should "take him
seriously," and that if they had any doubts about that, they
should "check with the people in Montgomery."
( http://www.guardian.co.uk/Print/0,3858,4531898,00.html) If this
conversation did in fact take place, which seems rather doubtful, the
logical conclusion to draw would have been that the sniper was
referring to Montgomery County, Maryland, where six of the sniper's
victims were shot. For some inexplicable reason though, police
immediately focused their attention on Montgomery, Alabama. Nearly
instantaneously, they then claimed to have connected the sniper
killings to a seemingly unrelated robbery/murder, which was committed
with a handgun of a caliber not known to have been in the possession
of Muhammad or Malvo. Why the investigators turned their attention to
Alabama, why they focused on this particular unsolved crime, and how
they were able to suddenly identify a previously unidentified
fingerprint, are all questions that police have not bothered to
provide answers to.
The L.A. Times reported that there were a number of items in the
suspects' car at the time of their arrest that seem a little out of
place in a homeless drifter's vehicle. In addition to, of course, the
Bushmaster rifle, scope and bipod, there was a Sony laptop computer,
a pair of two-way radios, and - as one might expect to find - a
global positioning system.
( http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-
sniper30oct30.story)
That same Times report implicates Muhammad in the February 16 murder
of a 21-year-old Tacoma woman. The link to Muhammad was made as
follows: "Tacoma Police Chief David A. Brame said at a news
conference late Monday that a Tacoma gun hobbyist he declined to
identify had befriended and housed Muhammad and Malvo for several
months this year. The gun owner came forward after the two men were
charged in the sniper rampage. Brame said the man voluntarily turned
over to police a .45-caliber semiautomatic pistol and a .44 magnum
revolver that he said he had loaned to Muhammad on occasion during
the first six months of this year." Ballistic tests purportedly
revealed that the .45 was used for the murder, and the .44 was used
to vandalize a synagogue. Obvious questions arise: Who is this
mysterious "gun hobbyist"? Is he a member of the law enforcement
community? Why did he "on occasion" loan his guns to a man he had
known for only a few months? For what purpose did he think the guns
were being used? Why isn't the "gun hobbyist" himself a suspect, and
why is his identity being protected?
On October 30, the New York Times reported that "State and federal
investigators said today that John Muhammad had been talking to them
for more than an hour on the day of his arrest in the sniper
shootings, explaining the roots of his anger, when the United States
attorney for Maryland told them to deliver him to Baltimore to face
federal weapons charges and forcing them to end their interrogation."
The investigators complained that Muhammad had waived his right to an
attorney and was talking freely when federal prosecutor Thomas Di
Biagio shut their interrogation down. Di Biagio claimed that he was
acting on orders from the White House and the Justice Department,
though both seem to have distanced themselves from Di Biagio's
actions. Investigators claim that they felt confident that they could
have gotten a confession out of Muhammad. Federal officials claimed,
rather remarkably, that they weren't really interested in a
confession. An unnamed "senior federal law enforcement official" was
quoted as saying: "Tell me what more we need from them? We have the
ballistics. We don't need the confession." But was it a confession
that the federal officials were worried about the investigators
hearing? Or was it something else? Whatever it was, they won't be
hearing it now -- the Times report noted that, "since then Muhammad
has not talked to investigators."
( http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/30/national/nationalspecial/30XCOUN.ht
ml?todaysheadlines)
The Independent Online noted in passing, without elaboration, that
Muhammad's ready supply of cash may have been due to a "combination
of odd jobs and crimes that included human smuggling."
( http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?
click_id=79&art_id=qw1035806221674B225&set_id=1) Is that what
Muhammad's rather mysterious travels were really all about? And if
so, on whose behalf was he working?
Clearly there was someone, or some entity, bankrolling Muhammad's
activities. Who were his hidden benefactors? The media will likely
either avoid the issue entirely, or will attempt to link Muhammad to
some sort of 'terrorist' organization, though it isn't likely that
many fingers will be pointed at his most likely benefactor -- that
world-wide terrorist organization that we all know and love as the
CIA.
This bulletin includes only the bits and pieces of incongruous
information that have emerged thus far through various avenues of the
media. While there is far more that has yet to be discovered, it is
already clear that there is much more to this story than what has
been presented to the American people.
Meanwhile, U.S. authorities are busily maneuvering to stage a trial
with a predetermined outcome -- one that will include the execution
of 17-year-old Malvo. The media is clamoring for that execution to
take place, even though there has been no compelling evidence
presented thus far to indicate the young man's guilt.

It is important to remember that we are talking here about a kid who
has been victimized throughout the entirety of his brief stay here on
planet Earth. Born onto the mean streets of Jamaica, in a land ruled
by violent drug-lords, and apparently abandoned by his father, Malvo
survived a childhood that no kid should have to endure.

Smuggled into the States in the hold of a cargo ship, in the hopes of
finding a better life, Malvo found nothing but further victimization
and despair -- at the hands of a man named John Allen Muhammad.

But through it all, Malvo remained - as friends and acquaintances
have reported - an intelligent, thoughtful, unerringly polite and
friendly kid -- who also was, if police spokesmen and the media are
to be believed, a serial sniper.

So let's execute the bastard. We don't even need to bother with a
trial. The sooner the better. Maybe we can make it the half-time show
at this year's Super Bowl. Then we'll all feel like winners.

AND THE SECOND IS

From Joe Vialls

In this article Joe tells the story of the trauma visited on one Australian family in pursuit of the new global oppression.
It also includes an account of the friendly visit of 2000 people to John Ashcroft’s homestead. Now this isn’t a particularly new tactic – the animal lib people have done it in a rather unfriendly way – but just to keep it nice you know , and to see some of our leading politicians on their own doorsteps, it seems quite a valid way of explaining the case

Masked goons wearing flak jackets and wielding sub-machine guns approach a home silently just before dawn. Then acting on a silent hand signal from their leader, they all break into a jog trot and fan out around the house. The first two demolish the front door with sledgehammers, while the other six simultaneously smash windows at the sides and rear of the small suburban dwelling. Screams can be heard from inside as these apparitions from hell burst into the bedrooms and force the unarmed occupants face-down on the floor. A woman and her four small children lie sobbing hysterically, while the “brave” leader of the masked goons sticks a Glock semi-automatic pistol up her husband’s nose, and cuffs his hands behind his back. Readers could be pardoned for thinking this was a scene from the old Stalinist Russia, or maybe just everyday brutal Jewish oppression of Palestinians in Palestine, but they would be wrong. This is 5.15 a.m. on 30 October 2002 in the sleepy suburbs of Perth, Western Australia, and the brutal masked goons are acting on the direct warrant of Daryl Williams, Australia’s equivalent to Donald Rumsfeld. Just like Rumsfeld’s prisoners illegally kidnapped and held in Cuba, the only crime this Australian family had committed was that of being Muslim, and thus causing political paranoia in Canberra. As Mr Williams himself rather foolishly admitted on national television, the goon operation, “is directed only at individuals who MAY have SOME KNOWLEDGE of J.I. [Jemaah Islamiah] in Australia. An illegal operation, perhaps? It certainly was. Australian law states that if the Australian Security Intelligence Organization [ASIO] has concerns about specific individuals, then those individuals may be approached to make voluntary statements on the matter. This is understood by police officers to mean making an appointment by telephone, or knocking politely on the front door during daylight hours. There was nothing at all voluntary about this operation, which horrified and outraged the lady living next door: “They broke down the door with sledgehammers. They were carrying machine guns and wearing black helmets and flak jackets, with balaclavas covering their faces. It was very frightening to look at, like something from a movie set. I was shaking and terrified, it was as though we had gone back fifty years to Nazi Germany.”




Rumsfeld, America
Williams, Australia


Daryl Williams has clearly made the same mistake as Donald Rumsfeld, apparently believing that because he is a “powerful official”, he can do whatever he wants to whomever he wants, whenever he wants. Actually, as megalomaniacs go, both men are actually on solid historical ground here. Atilla the Hun and Joe Stalin thought exactly the same way. The Perth family raided by the masked goons are ethnic Indonesian Muslims who have lived quietly in Perth since 1989, with the oldest child preparing to sit high school exams, and the youngest only two years of age. The shocking “crime” their father “may” have had some “knowledge” of, was visiting Sydney back in 1996 to listen to a lecture given by Abu Bakar Bashir, who according to the media is,” now under arrest in Jakarta and a key suspect in the Bali bombings.” After harassing the terrified family for six hours, the armed and masked goons left without pressing any charges or making any arrests, proving in absolute terms what Mr Williams had unwisely said on nationwide television. Whether or not the innocent occupant “may” have had some ‘knowledge” of a lecture given by Bashir back in 1996 [long before ASIO made him into a ‘Terrorist’ last week], could very easily have been established by a simple legal telephone call, or a simple legal knock on the door during daylight hours. The elderly and very frail Abu Bakar Bashir himself, could only be a viable suspect if he had somehow managed to steal an Israeli micro nuclear device from Dimona in The Negev Desert, which seems most unlikely. No matter, the Mossad had to create alternative suspects in a hurry, and the CIA rushed to oblige by bringing heavy pressure to bear on its subordinate antipodean ally. The tea lady at Langley called the Australian Government, and less than two days later, all members and supporters of Jemaah Islamiah were labeled “Terrorists” by ASIO, which reports directly to Daryl Williams. The words “Intelligence” in ASIO’s title is a little misleading, because it seems to infer that members are highly skilled operatives with years of experience countering terrorism in its many different manifestations. Sadly for Australia, nothing could be further from the truth. The prime requirements for joining ASIO are a double university degree [any sort, history is very well thought of], and ten years unbroken residence in Australia. The latter requirement effectively limits ASIO applicants to full time academics who have lived nowhere else in the last ten years, and who as a result have zero real-life experience of overseas operations, or even overseas cultures. In turn this makes ASIO operatives chicken-meat for the wily politicians, who have erroneously led them to believe that they can carry out their illegal political orders in complete secrecy. This was demonstrated by one pompous fool in Perth, who read the riot act to media crews assembled outside the suburban house that had just been attacked. “You should be aware that if you take photos or videos [of the gun-toting goons] and publish them, you will be at risk of prosecution. This is a Commonwealth matter.” No, it is not a Commonwealth matter. When innocent unarmed civilians have been illegally savaged at dawn by masked goons carrying sledgehammers and loaded weapons, it is a matter for the attention of the entire Australian community, and the rest of the world. You see, rather like America’s kidnapped prisoners in Cuba, someone somewhere is always individually responsible for the atrocity in legal terms, i.e. the person who actually signs the order or warrant. In America the responsible individual is Donald Rumsfeld, and in Australia it is Daryl Williams.



An 89-year-old Afghan "Terrorist" recently released from Rumsfled's personal prisonin Cuba, explains how he was interrogated by Americans all the time, and forced to live and defacate in a tiny wire cage "like an animal" for more than eleven months

Such men frequently feel they are “above” ordinary common people, and sail through life protected by large bank accounts and even larger body guards. Until recently their families also lived in splendid isolation, far removed from the everyday atrocities committed by their husbands and fathers. Then suddenly last week, Donald Rumsfeld’s family was subjected to a small part of the same anxiety and terror he has illegally inflicted on hundreds of kidnapped men in Cuba for almost a year. Millions of Americans are upset at the illegal treatment and torture these prisoners have received on Rumsfeld’s orders, and many more are equally upset by his determination to bomb countless thousands of innocent women and children in Iraq. Aware that conventional demonstrations against such barbaric activities are nowadays completely ignored by the “establishment’, 2,000 thoughtful demonstrators decided to make it “personal”, by marching on the Rumsfeld private family home in New Mexico. It was a non-violent demonstration [this time around], which apparently rattled Donald Rumsfeld and his family considerably. The peasants were literally right outside the front door, were making menacing gestures, and clearly did not approve of Daddy’s latest escapades. But no matter how uncomfortable individual members of the Rumsfeld family may have felt, their discomfort was a mere drop in the bucket when compared to the agony felt by Daddy’s tortured prisoners in Cuba. This is a new technique so far as I am aware, but one that is likely to filter through to other demonstrators around the world very quickly, because they have extremely efficient methods of communication that often defeat eavesdropping attempts by various government agencies. Whether or not the new technique will catch on I do not know, because I am a writer rather than a demonstrator. That said, the “Up Close and Personal” business worked so well in New Mexico that it might appeal to locals in Australia. If it does, Mr Williams will likely find rather more than a small crowd of polite journalists waiting for him when he return home from the office each night. Where the armed and masked Australian goons are concerned, I can only suggest that you take considerably more care before picking up your loaded weapons and rushing off to do a politician’s bidding, no matter how ‘important” you might perceive that politician to be. If still unsure of your ground, err on the cautious side and look up the criteria used for judging the continuing legitimacy of a system, and the authority holders within it. These criteria can be found on page 135 of “Crimes of Obedience” by Herbert C. Kelman and V. Lee Hamilton. Open quote: 1. Is the demand within the “sphere of competence” of the authorities – within the domain in which they are entitled to issue demands?2. Does the demand conform to the procedures for exercising authority, prescribed by the rules [legal and traditional] to which the authorities are subject?3. Is the demand being applied equitably to the different individuals and sub groups that make up the population?4. Is the demand consistent with the larger normative framework the authorities share with other citizens. For example, apart from being executed according to the legally prescribed procedures, is the demand itself constitutional? 5. Is the policy in which this demand is embedded congruent with the stated values of the political system – values on which its perceived legitimacy ultimately rests?A negative answer to one of more of these questions constitutes grounds, within a democratic framework of legitimacy, for challenging the legitimacy of the demand and for refusing to obey it.” End quote. Sorry guys, but the pre-dawn attack on the house in Perth partly fails criteria 2, and completely fails 3, 4 and 5. You should have refused the illegal demand to storm the house and stick a gun up the occupant’s nose. “Crimes of Obedience”, Kelman and Hamilton, Vail-Ballou Press, Binghamton, New York. ISBN 0-300-04184-5. This book is probably available online through Amazon.
http:www.geocities.com/wecontrolamerica/spooks.html