Pages

Tuesday, February 9, 2010

Help Save Virginia's Wilderness Battlefield from Wal-Mart

The Civil War's Wilderness Battlefield is under siege...again! But, this time it does not involve soldiers and artillery. Wal-Mart and JDC Ventures LLC have proposed to commercially develop 240,000 square feet on critically important land at the historic Wilderness Battlefield and just across the road from the National Park Service's center of interpreting the Battle of the Wilderness.

NPCA and its partners have determined that Wal-Mart's project would irrevocably harm the battlefield, undermine the visitor's experience of the National Military Park, and open the door for more incompatible, large-scale development at the gateway to the national park.


Save the Battlefield from Wal-Mart


Subject:
Relocation of Orange County, VA, Wal-Mart Supercenter


Dear [ Decision Maker ],

I am writing you to ask that you please protect our nation's Civil War heritage for the benefit of future generations. 

Like Virginia's Governor Tim Kaine and many thousands of Americans, I am seriously concerned that the proposed Wal-Mart development in Orange County, Virginia, would permanently harm historic Wilderness Battlefield and the Fredericksburg & Spotsylvania National Military Park. 

I am writing to ask you to relocate Wal-Mart's proposed Supercenter to another site in Orange County, but away from the battlefield and the national park.  Ultimately, this is your decision. 

Wal-mart is getting to big for it over sized britches. It is like they have senators in their pockets feeding them when they need something approved. Now they want to build near an Historical Battlefield, nuts plain nuts.  DO NOT DO IT, I could not vote in any re-election of any congress person who did not support the Virginia Wilderness Battlefield against Wal-mart.... There has to be another location away from the Battlefield, where the truck traffic will not matter but the battlefield...GEEZ
 And that you can take to the bank, and thats all I have to say on the subject

Thank you for considering my comments and helping to preserve our nation's unique and irreplaceable heritage.

Keep BLM lands near Katmai and Lake Clark National Parks closed to mining

One million acres of prime wolf, bear, and salmon habitat adjacent to Lake Clark and Katmai National Parks could be opened to new mining claims with the stroke of a pen. Closed to mining since 1971, these wild Alaska lands are integral to Bristol Bay's salmon-supporting ecosystem that is anchored by these two grand national parks.

A recommendation from the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to lift this mineral closure and expand a modern day gold rush was issued in the last days of the Bush Administration and we need your help to send this bad idea back to the drawing board.
Send a letter to Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar 

Keep BLM lands near Katmai and Lake Clark National Parks closed to mining



Subject:
 Keep BLM Lands near Katmai and Lake Clark National Parks Closed to Mining


Dear [ Decision Maker ],

Last November, just after the election, the Bureau of Land Management recommended that you lift a mineral closure that has kept 1 million acres of land adjacent to Katmai and Lake Clark National Parks closed to mining since 1971. These parks are located in southwest Alaska's Bristol Bay, home of the largest wild salmon fishery left on earth and an area already under siege from a future mining district that is anchored by the proposed Pebble Mine.

Please don't sign anything that would open these lands to mining. The modern day gold rush occurring in this region is threatening not only the fish and wildlife, but also the livelihood of many local residents that depend on undeveloped lands. Adding another million acres to the stampede for gold will only add to the problems.

Instead, I would ask that you send the recommendation back to BLM to have them do a better job of scientifically reviewing the impacts of 1 million acres of new mines upon the area's fish and wildlife and our national parks. Please ask the BLM to evaluate permanent protections for these lands for the sake of Bristol Bay's clean waters and cultural traditions so we can protect Katmai's and Lake Clark's wolves, bears, and wild salmon forever.

NO STRIP MINING, are you crazy, destroy a natural habitat, that supports wolf, bear and salmon. Salmon that for hundreds of years have swam the rivers to get to their spawning grounds.  If there are future salmon where do they go if their rivers are destroyed, GEEZ....miniong destroys lands, look at other strip mining in other parts of the country large naked holes with roads that go down and down and down, you can't fill them back up  DO NOT DO IT....... You need to seriously take measures to protect it for my greatgrandchildren, and yours. Do you not want them to see the natural beauty of a n ecosystem that thrives. Mining would destroy it and it would never recover,that is a crime against nature, and I could not vote in any re-election of any congress person who did not support the Katmai and Lake Clark National Parks against the Bureau of Land Management. And that you can take to the bank, and thats all I have to say on the subject

Save Everglades National Park from Mining

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers plans to issue mining permits for the destruction of up to 15,000 acres of wetlands near Everglades National Park. Together with existing mines, this would convert 30 square miles of historic Everglades and wildlife habitat into deep mining pits. Alternative plans exist and include buffers to protect the park, but these plans still allow at least eight years of mining.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has the authority to stop the proposed mining project. Tell EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson that the current proposals will cause unacceptable damage to the Everglades.

Save Everglades National Park

 Subject:
Miami-Dade Lake Belt Mining Permits Re-issue

Dear [ Decision Maker ],

I am writing to urge the EPA to intervene to stop current plans to expand limestone mining activities in the Everglades, our country's largest subtropical wilderness.

The Army Corps of Engineers' proposals both to re-issue mining permits set aside last January by a federal court because of violations of federal environmental laws and to approve expansion of the mining would irreversibly destroy critical wetlands and endangered species habitat, harm Everglades restoration, contaminate local drinking water supplies and cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars. Everglades National Park has already been devastated by a century of draining the Everglades and poor growth management, and must be protected from further harmful practices.

The EPA has the legal authority and the responsibility to prevent the permanent harm that the proposed mining would cause to the Everglades and drinking water. The EPA should only approve a five-year mining plan that includes buffers to protect the Everglades and the public wellfield. This would still allow years of mining while necessary studies are completed to see if any more mining can be done safely and without unacceptable environmental impacts.


I grew up going to the everglades, riding air boats, camping, stepping on alligators, heheheh, seriously, NO STRIP MINING, are you crazy,  GEEZ....mining destroys lands, look at other strip mining in other parts of the country large naked holes with roads that go down and down and down, you can't fill them back up  DO NOT DO IT....... You need to seriously take measures to protect it for my greatgrandchildren, and yours. Do you not want them to see the natural beauty of a n ecosystem that thrives. Mining would destroy it and it would never recover,that is a crime against nature, and I could not vote in any re-election of any congress person who did not support the Everglades National Park against the EPA. And that you can take to the bank, and thats all I have to say on the subject

Clear the Air in America's National Parks

 My comment:
 Why is it that our National Parks are under seige from big business and that the groups that are suppose to protect these parks from interests who want to destroy them.   We American's have to save them for our next several generations, otherwise our legacy of beautiful clean natural parks given to us by some Presidents and people who wanted us to protect these lands will disappear to companies who want to mine, build communities to close or build big commercial properties, and we have to support the President with his clean air proposals.  Natural clean air is essential to plants, animals, aand for people who visit the parks. Get out and show your support, carry signs, send these letters and promise not to re-elect any senator who does not support the President, whether they are Democrat or Republican this has to bipartisan......There are four letters here regarding four different parks in the United States

Be a wise American know what all the issues are, and where you can help........Now that is all I have to say about that.

 
Our national parks--and their visitors--are threatened by dirty air. Ground-level ozone, formed mostly in the summer months from automobile, industrial, and coal-fired power plant pollution, is one of the most deadly forms of air pollution and has a history of catastrophic consequences for people and parks. Across the United States park ecosystems show damage from ozone pollution.

However, new, stronger ground-level ozone rules from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) could protect both parks and people, but protection is not guaranteed. The EPA has proposed a range of standards, from more to most protective. Big polluters and others will pressure EPA to adopt the weakest possible standards, and we can help counter that pressure by explicitly stating our support for the strongest standards. That's why we're suggesting you specify the precise standard you support in the letter you send to EPA. For more information on the range of standards proposed by EPA, please see EPA's Ozone Fact Sheet by clicking on the "Tell me more" link. Please contact EPA and let them know you care!

 Clear the Air for America's National Parks

Subject: Ozone stndards



Dear [ Decision Maker ],

I 'm writing to comment on the Environmental Protection Agency's proposal to revise the air quality standards for ground-level ozone. America's national parks are at risk: every summer visitors and the parks alike are harmed by ozone pollution. Our national parks should be a place of refuge during the summer months, but today many Americans, especially children, the elderly, and people with asthma, heart, and lung issues, are unable to safely hike or bike in many of our national parks due to ozone levels. I hope you will choose the standard that is most protective of park visitor health. Make every day in America's national parks a safe day to visit for every American.


I hope you will also consider the value of protecting national park ecosystems. Ozone pollution from coal-fired power plants and automobiles has long damaged multiple species of plants and trees and the wildlife that depend on them. From the Great Smoky Mountains to Yosemite, ground-level ozone pollution threatens the long-term sustainability of America's parks.

Our parks and the public deserve the most protective and science-based standards.  I therefore urge you to set the "primary" ground-level ozone standard at .060 parts per million to protect public health, and the "secondary" ground-level ozone standard at 7 ppm-hours to protect healthy parks and ecosystems.


This is a national crime,some Presidents have set aside these beautiful parks for the people of America to have and behold their beauty, and now with the pollution of the air some Americans can nor even enjoy them. I believe we should step up and embrace what President Obama wants to do in clean air and energy, aand we should not be Democrat or Republican, we should united Americans saving our national parks for our future generations.
That is all I have to say on the subject.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this important proposal.

Monday, February 8, 2010

NASA Night Shuttle Launch

The Space Shuttle Endeavour launched early this morning from NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The six-member crew is embarking on its 13-day mission to deliver a new room and observation deck for the Int'l Space Station. The launch is the last nighttime liftoff of the shuttle, and only four more flights remain before the program comes to a close later this year.
Washington, DC 


Endevor lift off the last night time launch
 
 


Published: February 8, 2010
KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, Fla. — The space shuttle Endeavour thundered into orbit before dawn Monday morning, briefly turning darkness into daylight.

It was the second effort to get the Endeavour off the ground, 24 hours after clouds over the launching pad scrubbed Sunday’s attempt.

Clouds again encroached, but there were enough holes to allow the Endeavour to lift off on schedule at 4:14 a.m., a bright streak rising to the northeast along the East Coast. It was the 130th launching of a shuttle and probably the last night launching as the program winds down and ends after four more flights.

“What a beautiful launch we had this morning,” William H. Gerstenmaier, NASA’s associate administrator for space operations, said in a news conference.

The Endeavour is carrying the last major piece of the International Space Station. Two of Endeavour’s crew members, Nicholas J. M. Patrick and Lt. Col. Robert L. Behnken of the Air Force, will conduct three spacewalks to install a 23-foot-long, 15-foot-wide Tranquility module.

The module includes a seven-windowed dome, or cupola, that will offer panoramic views of Earth and space. The viewing area, large enough for two astronauts, will be used for controlling the station’s 60-foot-long robotic arm and to observe other activities outside the station.

The Endeavour is also delivering space parts for the station’s water system that recycles urine and sweat into clean water.

A camera on the shuttle’s external tank detected a strip of insulating foam falling off about two minutes into the flight. Mr. Gerstenmaier estimated it at a quarter-inch thick and a foot long.

“It didn’t appear to impact the orbiter,” Mr. Gerstenmaier said, “and we see no damage to the orbiter.”

As with all shuttle missions since the loss of the Columbia in 2003, engineers will spend several days examining the foam loss to ensure there was no damage to the Endeavour’s heat shield.

The commander of the 13-day mission is Col. George D. Zamka of the Marines, and the pilot is Col. Terry W. Virts Jr. of the Air Force. The other crew members are Stephen K. Robinson and Capt. Kathryn P. Hire of the United States Navy Reserve.

While the Endeavour mission was off to a smooth start, Gen. Charles F. Bolden Jr., the NASA administrator, admitted he had not done a good job of laying out a clear picture of the agency’s future.
At a news conference on Saturday, he accepted blame for the rocky reception that has greeted President Obama’s plans to revamp NASA’s human spaceflight program.

The plans, revealed in Mr. Obama’s budget request for 2011, call for the cancellation of Constellation, the program that was to return astronauts to the Moon by 2020. Under the new budget proposal, money that went to the Constellation would instead be used to develop new space technologies like fueling stations in orbit, and the task of developing rockets for carrying astronauts to the International Space Station would be turned over to commercial companies.

General Bolden said some of the work in the Constellation program might yet be preserved. “I don’t want to throw out the baby with the bath water, if you will,” he said.

General Bolden also offered some conciliatory words as he acknowledged that the proposal for NASA would probably change as it winds through the budget process. “I do have to negotiate with my partners in Congress,” he said.

He said NASA would still work on a heavy-lift rocket even as the budget proposal seeks to cancel the Ares V, the behemoth rocket that would have carried the cargo for a lunar mission.

General Bolden said, however, that he did not expect the heavy-lift rocket to be ready until after 2020.

Obama Plans Bipartisan Summit on Health Care

 

Published: February 7, 2010

WASHINGTON — President Obama said Sunday that he would convene a half-day bipartisan health care session at the White House to be televised live this month, a high-profile gambit that will allow Americans to watch as Democrats and Republicans try to break their political impasse.

Mr. Obama made the announcement in an interview on CBS during the Super Bowl pre-game show, capitalizing on a vast television audience. He set out a plan that would put Republicans on the spot to offer their own ideas on health care and show whether both sides are willing to work together.
“I want to come back and have a large meeting, Republicans and Democrats, to go through systematically all the best ideas that are out there and move it forward,” Mr. Obama said in the interview from the White House Library.
Mr. Obama challenged Republicans to attend the meeting with their plans for lowering the cost of health insurance and expanding coverage to more than 30 million uninsured Americans. Republican leaders said they welcomed the opportunity and called on Democrats to start the debate from scratch, which the president said he would not do.
The move by Mr. Obama comes after weeks in which the administration has appeared uncertain about how to proceed on his top domestic priority since Republicans captured the Senate seat previously held by Senator Edward M. Kennedy. House and Senate Democrats had been increasingly at odds over what the bill should say, how to move ahead tactically and, in some cases, whether to continue at all.
The idea for the bipartisan meeting, set for Feb. 25, was reached in recent weeks, aides said, as part of the White House strategy to intensify its push to engage Congressional Republicans in policy negotiations, share the burden of governing and put more scrutiny on Republican initiatives.
Mr. Obama’s announcement came after he surprised his rivals in late January by requesting that a session with House Republicans be open to cameras. That meeting produced a spirited 90-minute question-and-answer session with the president that many in the White House viewed as a critical success for Mr. Obama.
In making the gesture on Sunday, Mr. Obama is in effect calling the hand of Republicans who had chastised him for not honoring a campaign pledge to hold health care deliberations in the open, broadcast by C-Span, and for not allowing Republicans at the bargaining table.
Nancy-Ann DeParle, the director of the White House Office for Health Reform, briefed Democratic Congressional staff members in a conference call ahead of the interview, with Katie Couric.
Separately, some Congressional staff members expressed concern that Mr. Obama’s meeting would simply prolong an already tortuous process. And Democrats still face steep challenges in reconciling the differences between the House and Senate bills.
Some House Democrats are firmly opposed to a proposed tax on high-cost employer-sponsored insurance policies, which they think will hit some middle-class workers and violate Mr. Obama’s campaign promise not to raise taxes on Americans earning less than $250,000 a year.
The president offered a number of questions that his party would have for the Republicans.
“How do you guys want to lower costs? How do you guys intend to reform the insurance market so that people with pre-existing conditions, for example, can get health care?” he said. “How do you want to make sure that the 30 million people who don’t have health insurance can get it? What are your ideas specifically?”
The question for Mr. Obama is how much — if at all — he is willing to give on some of the concepts Democrats have already agreed on, or if he is using the meeting to lay the groundwork for another effort by Democrats to push the legislation through without Republican votes.
Mr. Obama did not indicate what he was willing to give up in the negotiations, nor did he chart a specific legislative strategy for moving a bill through Congress. Democrats in the House and Senate were hoping to resolve their differences in the bill, aides said, and present a unified health care plan in time for the meeting.
Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, said in a statement that he welcomed the bipartisan meeting on health care and called on the president to begin the dialogue “by shelving the current health spending bill.”
“The fact is Senate Republicans held hundreds of town halls and met with their constituents across the country last year on the need for health care reform, outlining ideas for the step-by-step approach that Americans have asked for,” Mr. McConnell said. “And we know there are a number of issues with bipartisan support that we can start with when the 2,700-page bill is put on the shelf.”
When asked by Ms. Couric if he would agree to discard the bill and start over, the president said he would not. The starting point, aides said, would be with the proposals that passed the House and Senate.
It remained an open question whether the meeting could lead to real consensus on health care, or whether it would serve only to allow Democrats to frame a political argument against the Republicans going into the midterm campaign.
Republicans were involved in the health care discussions for months last year in the Senate Finance Committee, but differences with Democrats were never resolved.
The bipartisan meeting on health care could give Mr. Obama an opportunity to display the command on health care issues he showed at the meeting with Republicans. The administration believes that the public is supportive of many of the provisions in the bill — particularly taking away the insurance bans for pre-existing conditions — but that the debate was overshadowed by a messy legislative process.
Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, the Republican leader, said he was looking forward to the bipartisan discussion. But he joined Mr. McConnell in calling for a fresh start to the health care debate.
“The problem with the Democrats’ health care bills is not that the American people don’t understand them — the American people do understand them, and they don’t like them,” Mr. Boehner said in a statement. “The best way to start on real, bipartisan reform would be to scrap those bills and focus on the kind of step-by-step improvements that will lower health care costs and expand access.”
In the interview on Sunday, Mr. Obama said he did not regret pursuing health care in the first year of his presidency, even though he intends to place a higher priority on job creation this year.
“It was the right thing to do then,” Mr. Obama. “It continues to be the right thing.”
David Herszenhorn contributed reporting.

Palin at the Tea Party Conference in Tennessee

TheVoicesofAmerica.org


These are a few videos about the TEA PARTY MOVEMENT and their Convention held in Tennessee this past weekend. with the main speaker being Sara Palin.





Where the Tea Party Movement Goes from Here
Precinct Organizing Best Practices and the Abigail Adams Project
Homemakers of America
The web site for the Abigail Adams project is still under construction so you will find information on Homemakers of America. There are also on the ning site Abigail Adams Project main site you can then go to your individual state site and sign up to join with your ning login.
I find it interesting that they do not put labels with the candidates, no Dem. or Republican, but they offer information that you might not know about the candidates that you might vote on because of party lines. For those that are Independent voters this site might be something you will be interested in,.


The White House answers (more of) your questions on Youtube

Friday, February 5, 2010

Michelle Obama Interviwed by Matt Lauer on The Today's Show





The Today's Show Matt Lauer interviwed Michelle Obama
“Last question,” Lauer said. “Is this fun? Is fun even a word that can be used to described what you’re living through right now?”

“I am having a ball,” Mrs. Obama said emphatically. “I really am. I mean, I love people, first of all, and I think it would be hard to be in this position if you fundamentally didn’t love people. So, I come to this with a certain level of just joy in hugging — I’m a hugger.”

She ticked off all the things that are right in her life.

“My life is filled with these wonderful interactions with Americans all across the country. That’s what I do every day. My staff is terrific. My kids are healthy. My husband’s fine. He’s got a hard job, but he can handle it.

“I’m having a ball, and, hopefully, I'm doing some good in the process. Check back with me in a year. But right now, I’m doing all right.”




First lady:
I’m ‘not that interesting’
Feb. 3: In an exclusive interview with TODAY’s Matt Lauer, Michelle Obama addresses the intense scrutiny she faces, but also says she is enjoying her role as first lady.



She’s taking on childhood obesity.

“There are the shocking statistics that are there,” Mrs. Obama said. “One in three kids are obese in this nation. And the numbers go up when you’re talking about the African-American and Hispanic communities. The most shocking sort of reality that really hits you is that, because the young generation is on track for the first time in this nation’s history of being less healthy, having a shorter life span than their parents.”

Thursday, February 4, 2010

Pres. Obama Joined Senate Dems to Rework Agenda, Campaign Message

President Obama and the Dems Caucus Annual Retreat

Pres. Obama met with the Senate Democratic Caucus at their annual retreat earlier today, where he urged Senate Democrats to support his ideas on various policies including job creation efforts, health care and climate change. The senators gathered to strategize on policy issues and define their political message ahead of the Congressional elections later this year. Washington, DC : 1 hr. 22 min.

Obama to do televised Q&A with Senate Dems

By Michael O'Brien - 02/02/10 04:50 PM ET
President Barack Obama will take questions from Senate Democrats on television this week at their retreat, Majority Leader Harry Reid's (D-Nev.) office announced Tuesday.

Obama will speak to the 60-member Senate Democratic Caucus on Wednesday morning during their retreat at the Newseum here in D.C.
The speech will be followed by a question-and-answer period, which will be televised, as was Obama's Q&A with House Republicans at their retreat last Friday. The nonpartisan political network C-SPAN announced the session would be televised in a tweet on Tuesday afternoon:

Watch C-SPAN 2 click the link above to watch President Obama addresses and takes questions from Senate Democrats at their retreat in DC.

Pundits on both sides of the aisle had welcomed the televised exchange with Republicans, and the White House said it hoped for a similar, televised session with Senate Republicans. The session with Democrats will be the second such session in less than a week.

Obama took questions from members of the House Democratic Caucus during their speech, though that session was behind closed doors.

Wednesday, February 3, 2010

Bald Eagle Tired Of Everyone Just Assuming It Supports War February 1, 2010

Bald Eagle The symbol of American might called the 2003 invasion of Iraq "ill-advised at best, illegal at worst."

THE OREGON WILDERNESS—Frustrated by the widely held assumption that he unequivocally endorses the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, a bald eagle said Monday that his thoughts on the conflicts were far more nuanced than many Americans might expect.
Speaking to reporters from his nest in the upper branches of a 175-foot ponderosa pine tree, the eagle explained that each member of his species was different and none should be taken for granted as a lockstep supporter of American military policy.
"I think World War II was justified, and I got behind the first Gulf War [in 1990]," said the bird, who has served as the national symbol of the United States since 1782. "But the recent war in Iraq, with its shifting rationale and poor planning, was clearly a huge mistake. Personally, I believe that these crucial, life-and-death matters deserve more honest and less politicized discussion than they get."
"I'm not a hawk or a dove," he added. "I'm an eagle."
The majestic bird of prey, who said he is not registered with any political party, admitted to having some ambivalence about the current mission in Afghanistan, lamenting that any argument one could make seemed to prompt an equally valid counterpoint.
Enlarge Image IraqThe eagle said he would like to visit Iraq someday, but is worried it might cause impromptu firefights.
"Sure, I understand the reasoning behind the latest troop surge," the eagle said regarding President Obama's plan to commit 30,000 additional soldiers to the region to combat the Taliban. "Can we allow that country to collapse and become an al-Qaeda safe haven again? That seems like a disastrous outcome to me, but at the same time, maybe our continued presence is just creating more terrorists in the long run. Plus, how can we work with someone as corrupt as [Afghan president] Hamid Karzai and still purport to be champions of democracy?"
"You see, these issues are not so cut and dried," continued the Haliaeetus leucocephalus specimen. "And yet, every time I try to explain myself from atop a flag pole or the middle of a baseball field, no one wants to listen. They just cheer and chant 'U.S.A.! U.S.A! U.S.A.!'"
Sources said the eagle then excused himself and launched into the air with a shrill "skree!" sound, returning three minutes later with a glistening fish in his talons.
"And another thing: We can't forget Pakistan," the eagle said as he used his hooked beak to tear at the flesh of the writhing rainbow trout. "We have to make sure that they're not so preoccupied with India that they neglect the terrorist threats within their own borders. Remember, Pakistan has nukes."
The eagle went on to tell reporters that, despite his attempts to individuate himself from the general public's perceptions of bald eagles, he could ultimately control his image only so much. He also admitted that he still had lingering resentment over the fact that someone had covertly photographed him crying on 9/11 and used the picture on a "Never Forget" dinner plate.
"I really hated being exploited like that," the eagle said. "Of course I cried on 9/11. Everyone did. But I guess that's the burden of being the symbol of a nation: People are going to use you in ways you don't always like. You step out of the nest to clear your head with a few minutes of soaring, and people automatically peg you as some kind of embodiment of American freedom worth killing and dying for."
"And, frankly, that's a little messed up," he added. "I'm just a bird."

Terror Experts Warn Next 9/11 Could Fall On Different Date

Chertoff Michael Chertoff cautions citizens to accept the possibility of a 5/24.


WASHINGTON—In an alarming development with wide-reaching implications for America's safety, Department of Homeland Security head Michael Chertoff and CIA Director Michael Hayden issued a joint report Monday warning that the next 9/11 could in fact occur on a different date.
The report, based on intelligence gathered by field-agents, found that a future 9/11 might take place on an entirely new month and day, including 4/24, 6/13, or even 10/12. According to the report, the nation could realistically find itself in the midst of a 5/25 scenario, as well as a potential 3/14 situation in the months to come.
8/28, 6/19, and 11/7 were also cited as possible 9/11s.
Enlarge Image Terror PosterA poster from the new DHS public-awareness campaign.
"While 9/11 has historically always fallen on 9/11, we as Americans need to be prepared for a wide range of dates," Chertoff said during a White House press conference. "There's a chance we could all find ourselves living in a post-6/10 world as early as next July. Unless, that is, we're already living in a pre-2/14 world."
"1/1, 1/2, 1/3, 1/4, 1/5," Chertoff continued for nearly 45 minutes, "12/28, 12/29, 12/30, 12/31—these are all plausible and serious threats."
An addendum to the report that includes leap years will be released by the end of March.
Though the DHS has identified more than 7,000 sensitive dates spanning the next 20 years, it did manage to rule out 4/15/04 and 10/38 as future 9/11s. The government report also confirmed that the next 9/11 would more than likely not involve an assault on the World Trade Center's North and South towers as it has in previous attacks.
Furthermore, the 350-page document rejected long-held beliefs that the next 9/11 would commence at 8:46 a.m. on a sunny Tuesday morning. In fact, it warns that a future attack could occur on a cloudy, snowy, or even brisk day, at 8:53 a.m., 10:42 p.m., or any one of the other 1,440 known times.
"We are dealing with agents of terror who are willing to carry out another 9/11 on—if you can imagine it—6/8," Hayden told reporters. "Indeed a day may come when we as a nation have to live in fear of another 6/8, recount where we were when 6/8 happened, and swear never to forget the events of 6/8."
"At some point we might even have to come to terms with the harsh lessons of 6/8," Hayden continued.
Hayden assured citizens, however, that no matter what date the imminent attacks fall on, he has every reason to believe that the next 9/11 will be carried out by militants, radicals, zealots, or extremists, who will stop at nothing, next to nothing, or very little to destroy America.
Hayden also said he was certain that at least one of the world's 6.7 billion human beings will plot the future 5/24 or 3/17 attacks, and that it will most likely target either the nation's subways, seaports, landmarks, stadiums, buildings, structures, or other indoor or outdoor areas where large groups of people tend to gather.
"Instead of calling major terrorist attacks on their soil 'our 9-11,' other nations may soon refer to their own national disasters as 'our 11/28,'" Chertoff said. "Which, incidentally, is also my birthday, though I admit that is neither here nor there."
At the conclusion of the press conference, Chertoff urged Americans not be alarmed by the recent news, and to continue living their lives as they have for the last seven years—with the crippling fear that at any moment they, or someone they love, could die in a fiery inferno.