WOT on Earth?

2012-01-26T11:32:00.000-08:00

WMDs in Iraq? The intelligence that there were NO WMDs in Iraq had been public domain for years. The ONLY contrary source was "Curveball", a well-known opportunist, liar and fraud, and his "information" was the "justification" for the Bush Administration's obsession to invade and occupy that country.

The spineless shills that call themselves "Democrats" - Hillary Clinton, Biden, Kerry, Clarke etc. etc. - also KNEW there were no WMDs, but said NOTHING. Why? Because in the wake of 9/11's shock and awe effect on the US public, everyone in DC was too scared to say what needed to be said.. They did not have the FREEDOM to represent the electorate, or their own common sense.

The only people who were patriotic enough to call the traitors and weasels in Washington DC, were the legions of protesters, name-called by the Fox News set as "morans" (!), who came out to warn people about the upcoming disaster, and the needless loss of life on both sides, including 4500 dead and 10s of thousands of maimed US troops, sent there to fight for a multi trillion scam.

To lie to Congress to start a war is treason. The penalty for treason can be the death penalty. I don't support the death penalty as a rule (on account of the possibility of executing an innocent person), but in this case, there are no innocents. Those who engineered that war are guilty, and they should pay the ultimate penalty. Yes, they should have a fair trial in a real US court of law, which is more than what can be said for those unfortunate people in Gitmo; after 10 years, only ONE has been charged with a crime, and that was for a "visa violation".

A pox on the two party treachery.

Falklands Flareup? Meddling in the Malvinas?

2012-01-26T09:52:00.000-08:00

An old conflict rears its head.

Deja vu, 1982. Does anyone remember the war in the Falkland Islands? A few weeks prior to that war, a group of "Argentinian scrap metal dealers" landed on South Georgia, a remote British ruled uninhabited island in the S.Atlantic, 1000 miles east of the Falklands. They raised the Argentine flag, and started to dismantle the old whaling station at the abandoned port of Gritvyken for the scrap iron and steel. Their activities were reported back, from the small UK garrison stationed on S. Georgia, to the governor of the Falklands, who in turn passed the information back to the UK government.

Thatcher did nothing. This was seen by the Argentine government as a clear signal that the UK wasn't interested in the Falklands. This was pretty much true - there had been virtually no support from London for years, and the islanders got most of their goods and services from neighboring Argentina. The Argentine military junta, led by Army General Galtieri started preparing an invasion. The US provided the Thatcher Administration with intelligence pertaining to the upcoming invasion, yet the Thatcher Administration did nothing... they sat back and waited until things got boiling, right up until the Argentinian invasion. The war could have gone either way, but the UK prevailed, and Thatcher remained in power (sadly for civilized society) for another 9 years.

The Falklands war was a tough one for the Reagan Administration, diplomatically. Reagan and Thatcher were the next thing to lovers. The Reagan Administration was also very supportive of the vicious Argentinian military junta, alongside numerous other South American fascist dictators and thugs who were coerced by the US into supporting the "Chicago School" economic model, which caused a 25 year humanitarian disaster throughout S. America.

The British Government never gave a rat's kidney about the people of the Falkland islands. That war was all about natural resources in the South Atlantic, and maintaining a presence in the region. This is also all about the ability to access potential mineral wealth in Antarctica, when the eventual demise of the 'no development' policy in Antarctica will allow for the exploitation of that continent.

Cameron's take is utterly bogus, with zero merit. I understand the islanders' desire to remain British, being well aware of Argentina's bloodstained past, courtesy of Kissinger's thugs, when people were disappearing by the thousand every year. But today, Argentina is far more of a democracy than the UK... which. largely as a result of false flag terrorist attacks both sides of the Atlantic, has turned into a maximum- security Big Brother obsessed, paranoid, peeping-tom surveillance society.

The islanders are under a smoke and mirrors impression, still shell shocked by the events of 30 years ago.

If problems flare again, there will be no doubt as to whom the US will support. Perhaps a false flag terrorist attack in the UK, blamed on the Argentinians, will be a method by which the UK government could enlist support from a skeptical public, either side of the Atlantic.

WTC Building 3 unable to find tenants

2012-01-24T09:59:00.000-08:00

My heart bleeds for Larry Silverstein, Bernie Madoff's buddyboy..

Story here:

Larry Silverstein bought the lease on the World Trade Center from the Port Authority of New York shortly before the attacks. The buildings were in violation of NYC codes and it was estimated that the mandated asbestos removal/treatment from the seven buildings in the complex would have cost several $$Billion. Many of the offices in the Twin Towers were vacant and the entire complex was losing money. Then he insured each building against separate terrorist attacks some 6 weeks prior to the attacks.

When asked as to why he bought the lease on the site, he said "it felt like the right thing to do". (?/!!)

If *I* had a business which was failing, which had several premises, then I insured each premises against arson attacks, and each building was burned to the ground shortly afterwards, I think the FBI would be quite interested, to say the least. Lucky Larry never was the subject of any inquiry; he is too well connected. He "Madoff" with some $4.5 billion in insurance money, no questions asked.

Imagine if the lease-holder had been an Arab?

Oh my.

Freedom Fries? Yes it does.

2012-01-16T11:17:00.000-08:00

While the petty bickering and squabbling continues about whether its better to elect a Democratic or Republican "Neville Chamberlain" in November 2012, the very essence of what America prides itself is being discarded, at a pace that accelerates each passing year.

If people are unaware of the trends...is it out of lack of interest, or lack of time? Too much stress? The concept is too nebulous? or the belief that "it can't happen here"is king? Those who do know may be in denial, or don't care, being generally skeptical that any negative consequences could affect them: The "maximum security" oriented society that is gradually evolving is directing its energies away from we law abiding citizens, towards "those" against whom have been indoctrinated. Then, of course, there are always those who say "if you obey the law, you have nothing to be bothered about".... the attitude that paves the road upon which dictators and henchmen strut

We may still be under the impression of living in a "free society". We get up, we go to work, watch TV, choose to drive or take public transport, we can start a business, go outside after dark etc. ... but isn't that true of pretty much anywhere else on Earth, barring a few anomalies, like North Korea?

If we really think we are that free, consider this article in the Washington Post. Yes, it's written by Jonathan Turley, a man hated by right wingers on account of his passionate "civil libertarianism"... but here he is sounding the warnings.

--- extracted below ---

Every year, the State Department issues reports on individual rights in other countries, monitoring the passage of restrictive laws and regulations around the world. Iran, for example, has been criticized for denying fair public trials and limiting privacy, while Russia has been taken to task for undermining due process. Other countries have been condemned for the use of secret evidence and torture.

Even as we pass judgment on countries we consider unfree, Americans remain confident that any definition of a free nation must include their own — the land of free. Yet, the laws and practices of the land should shake that confidence. In the decade since Sept. 11, 2001, this country has comprehensively reduced civil liberties in the name of an expanded security state. The most recent example of this was the National Defense Authorization Act, signed Dec. 31, which allows for the indefinite detention of citizens. At what point does the reduction of individual rights in our country change how we define ourselves?

While each new national security power Washington has embraced was controversial when enacted, they are often discussed in isolation. But they don’t operate in isolation. They form a mosaic of powers under which our country could be considered, at least in part, authoritarian. Americans often proclaim our nation as a symbol of freedom to the world while dismissing nations such as Cuba and China as categorically unfree. Yet, objectively, we may be only half right. Those countries do lack basic individual rights such as due process, placing them outside any reasonable definition of “free,” but the United States now has much more in common with such regimes than anyone may like to admit.

These countries also have constitutions that purport to guarantee freedoms and rights. But their governments have broad discretion in denying those rights and few real avenues for challenges by citizens — precisely the problem with the new laws in this country.

The list of powers acquired by the U.S. government since 9/11 puts us in rather troubling company.

The list of 10, as quoted by Turley, are the following:

* Assassination of U.S. citizens
* Indefinite detention
* Arbitrary justice
* Warrantless searches
* Secret evidence
* War crimes
* Secret courts
* Immunity from judicial review
* Continual monitoring of citizens
* Extraordinary renditions

No matter which position one occupies in the political spectrum, it is impossible to reconcile the notion of a nation that prides itself on freedom and justice, when the powers-that-be are acquiring such draconian authority, when there is no demonstrable justification for it.

Shortly after 9/11, George W. Bush told Americans and the world that "America was attacked because they hate our freedoms". Even though that statement - as it was intended to be understood by those who told GBW what to say - was utterly bogus as a motivation for the attacks, the decay of America that started on 9/12/2001 and is accelerating under the Obama regime, is ironically what the legendary/mythical attackers "wished to be foisted upon America". They got exactly what they wanted....

Remember "Freedom Fries"? It appears that freedom is frying in the skillet of big, intrusive "heavy manners" government. What's sizzling away in the pan is still recognizable, but the edges are getting curled up and browned off. We're not even a quarter of the way down that road yet - the fact that the Washington Post published this article demonstrates such - but if the current trends maintain, give it another 15 years and the notion of America as "land of the free" will be but a memory.

Guest Entry: "Conspiracy Theory", by Wing Cdr. Douglas Manley (RAF Ret'd)

2011-11-30T10:00:00.000-08:00

Thanks to Douglas Manley for sending me the following essay. Bravo!

*****

Recently, marketing "guru" Seth Godin wrote a piece on “The Marketing of Conspiracy Theories”. In his blog post Godin defines conspiracy theories as “a complex, alternative explanation for the truth” and he goes on to say - "and by definition they are not true.”

A conspiracy by definition is “an agreement to perform together an illegal, treacherous or evil act.” This implies a criminal or evil act planned and carried out by more than one person. By association of absurdities which have also been labelled conspiracy theories- such as the Loch Ness Monster, UFOs - conspiracy is redefined as something which is not to be believed. Since when did alien invasions involve a crime? This is an obvious psychological trick to cause people to reject all so-called “conspiracy theories” on the basis that they are irrational, suspect, unbelievable,” i.e. too silly to deserve the effort of a serious refutation.”

“For the idea that conspiracy theories as such are intellectually suspect helps conspirators, quite literally, to get away with murder (of which killing people in an unjust war is an instance). -- Charles Pidgen (who is referenced by Cass Sunstein in his report on conspiracy theories).

There have been many instances of conspiracies in our government, corruption, coverups, banking crimes, election fraud, which have gone un-investigated, unsolved and no one has been held accountable. These conspiracies are more than a simple lack of transparency or deception. When it comes to major crimes, the huge majority involve conspiracy.

The Iran Contra affair was a huge conspiracy, involving many high level officials. All government coups, the Nazi death camps, Watergate, "MKULTRA" are proven conspiracies. Did anybody doubt the guilt of Charles Manson? Or the Great Train Robbers? Many of these conspiratorial crimes are solved when the “theory” becomes a set of facts, and then there is no controversy.

What is being sold is doubt, not proof. Doubt is something people often want to buy, particularly if it gives them comfort. Seth Godin

It may be that “doubt” is being sold because there are a lot of questions without answers, but doubt does not give much comfort; people who “buy” conspiracy theories do not do so because they wish to “buy” doubt. They are hoping for proof. People do love a good story; they love a good mystery, and they want it solved. People also like revelations; they like the “Aha!” moments of truth revealed. People prefer closure to doubt. Consider those who lost family members in the 9/11 attacks who have not had that closure: Would they prefer uncertainty, anger, frustration and fear over closure?

In a court room trial, the job of the prosecution is to cast doubt upon the story of a witness, or vice versa. Casting doubt is an important part of fact finding. If one story proves to be full of holes, one continues the search for solid evidence elsewhere. Scientific method begins with a hypothesis (theory) which is then tested for veracity. If one hypothesis doesn’t bear out through rigorous and peer reviewed fact finding and experimentation, a new one is suggested, only then is the old discarded.

Some theories and hypothesis are obviously silly. It is probably not worth much effort to investigate a theory that pigs can fly if you feed them enough beans. Crimes as big as 9/11 need to be investigated properly. The 9/11 Commission which was tasked with finding out the truth of 9/11, with “no stones left unturned” was deemed a failure even by its own two co-chairs and the majority of the Commissioners. Yes, there are some absurd and unbelievable theories being posited about what happened on 9/11 - space weapons, no planes theory, etc. When looking at the available science, and treating 9/11 as a crime, there is compelling evidence which still needs to be examined, evidence which the original Commission omitted or refused to evaluate. Cherry-picking the evidence, a.k.a. "dry labbing" is the worst form of bad science.

The government’s own “conspiracy theory” about the towers' collapses actually defies several laws of physics: the second law of thermodynamics, Newton’s third law of motion and the law of conservation of momentum. N.I.S.T. (the National Institute for Standards and Technology) quietly altered their report when it was pointed out that they had given false information regarding the acceleration of the fall of Building 7 for the first 2.3 seconds, when it was in absolute free fall - later admitting it was so. They did not examine how or why this could have happened.

“People don't embrace them [conspiracy theories] because they're true, they embrace them because they are more satisfying, they show agency and intent, and they provide a level of solace by implying external causes to significant events.” Seth Godin.

Some people may have embraced the Government’s Conspiracy Theory of 9/11 because it provides some comfort “by implying external causes to significant events.” These are people who refuse to look at the evidence because they do not wish to doubt their government and their media, and are afraid to look at the facts. They prefer to maintain their comfort zones rather than face uncomfortable realities. To do so might shake their foundations. Labelling something as a “conspiracy theory” puts it neatly in a box where it can be easily dismissed. Life can go on - put a lid on it and move on. But this means that those who need to be held accountable have got away with their crime and are free, at large to continue with their criminal behaviours.

Besides the shock and awe of 9/11, the corporate media repeated a story over and over again which, in light of the facts which have been revealed over the past ten years, does not gel with reality. The discovery of military grade nano-thermite in the dust samples is just one possible smoking gun which needs to be investigated thoroughly. Without even testing for explosive residue, the original N.I.S.T. report claims there was no evidence of explosives and when questioned said that that there was no point in testing for it.

The original 9/11 “imprint” wrapped in fear remains in the public psyche enabling an agenda of pre-emptive wars thousands of miles from our shores, an endless war on terror, infringement of civil liberties at home, and the creation of a paranoid, maximum security type mentality. “Terror, terror, terror, all the time...”

Besides the fear factor, the official conspiracy theory of 9/11 was an easy sell because the alleged perpetrators belong to a religious faith against which the American public has been programmed for up to 50 years to distrust and even hate on a broad scale.

All 9/11 “conspiracy theories” will come to a close when there is a real investigation with true subpoena power and the truth is revealed -- and more importantly, the real culprits are held accountable.

The Government’s premiere witness - Khalid Sheikh Mohammed - gave testimony derived from being tortured - which is not admissible in a proper US Court of Law. Much of the 9/11 Commission Report was based on this inadmissible “evidence”. It is possible that some people don't want KSM to be tried here in a court in the US because KSM might actually spill some real beans, if his brain hasn’t turned to jelly from all the torture. KSM has claimed that he conspired to kill Presidents Clinton and Carter, the Pope, blow up the Sears Tower and the Empire State Building; he was responsible for the Bali bombings, the 1993 WTC bombings, the shoe bombing plot - at least 28 terror attacks around the world. What would you do if you were water boarded 183 times? After the first 20 seconds most people would confess to killing Jesus, Lincoln and Kennedy.

There are viable - and most likely provable - alternative narratives of what really happened on 9/11, if there is a criminal investigation. A real investigation will follow the money, examine the motive, review all the facts without prejudice, include independent analysis and full subpoena power. However, this investigation will not see the light of day and the perpetrators will get off without consequence - as long as those who have the power to influence continue to bandy the word “conspiracy theory”. Not only is our mainstream corporate media feeding this lie, but also intellectuals are being targeted in a form of cognitive infiltration by a variety of respected and credible sources.

What people want to believe is really the key to how the official story is maintained. No one really wants to believe their government or elements within their government might be so corrupt that they would allow or be complicit or part of something so horrific as 9/11. We want to have trust, to believe that our government has integrity, that it is here to protect and serve the people. Isn’t that a basic premise in our Western society?

For those who have not taken the time to look at the facts of 9/11, I highly recommend looking first at the 9/11 Commissioner's own book, After that take a good look at the way Building 7 came down; this was not even mentioned in that original report. Building 7 was not hit by a plane. There were only a few small fires in the building. There are several other buildings nearby which also suffered damage from the collapse of WTC 1 & 2. They were still standing. The Deutsche Bank Building right next to the towers was damaged when the South Tower collapsed; it was still standing and is currently being torn down.

Then consider this. In Madrid a steel frame building burned for 24 hours. The building was still standing, and even though the media tried to tell us that it might collapse, as if to reinforce the post 9/11 reality, it did not. Repeat a lie long enough, then drop the story when the building doesn’t collapse; this is how the media has used its coercion to manipulate our minds into believing the collapse of Building 7 was possible because of the fires. It was not a raging inferno like the steel structure in Madrid. Yet Building 7 collapsed at free fall acceleration.

Regarding the Twin Towers, destabilizing the buildings by jet impact might have caused the topmost portions of the buildings to partially collapse, asymmetrically - as in an earthquake, but not explosively, in near free fall. The fire from the jet fuel did not burn hot enough; the black smoke shows an inefficient, low temperature fire. According to radio reports from FDNY logs from the North Tower just prior to the collapse, the fires were virtually burned out by the time the firemen reached the impact area, and the areas of the steel beams nearest the fires would have been cooling.

Compare pictures of failed demolitions, where floors actually do pancake and buildings tilt, with what was left of the World Trade Towers. Why have more than 1,630 accredited architects and engineers who have studied all the available evidence, put their careers in jeopardy because they believe that the Twin Towers and Building 7 came down as the result of some form of controlled demolition. NIST, and other government and independent agencies have disproven the “pancake theory”, yet this idea is still used to discredit so-called “conspiracy theories”.

And there are hundreds of other facts, coincidences and impossibilities enough to fill dozens of books. There is the elimination from the 9/11 Commission Report of the financial trail, and important testimony from credible witnesses. The Bush administration made a concerted effort to prevent any form of investigation. When Bush and Cheney appeared before the Commission, they would not do so under oath, and their testimony was secret, citing “executive privilege”. Why? They should not be afraid of a real investigation, unless of course there is something to hide.

As I watched the towers fall on 9/11, as they disintegrated into dust, I felt there was something else going on besides the impact of two planes. The explosive cloud first billowed upwards and out. Some large pieces of the building were jettisoned at high speed and landed in buildings blocks away. This is not how a gravity collapse works.

In addition, several documentary films have been made about the environmental disaster aspect of 9/11, which exposed a trail of lies by various officials, all the way up to James Connaughton in the White House.

There was a cover up and conspiracy; Connaughton told the EPA to doctor the press releases. He and others in the White House obviously made some decisions, as did Mayor Giuliani's Office in New York to cover up the fact that the dust was toxic. Environment Secretary Christie Todd Whitman went along with it in her announcement that the "air was safe to breathe and the water was safe to drink". Now thousands of people are ill and more than a thousand have died as a direct result. It took 6 years for the Zadroga Bill to be passed, and it doesn't cover cancer, even though there are now studies which show that cancer is a major factor. Hello? Asbestos and mercury are known carcinogens. Why did it take a comedian, Jon Stewart, to shame Congress into passage of that bill? Hopefully, he will continue to shape the dialogue as this comes up again in January - March 2012.

At the time, in the early months when it really mattered to the health of those who were exposed to this toxic dust, agency officials who questioned the official story got fired, removed from their job or the story, or moved to another position. Corrupt people in our government would never do anything bad to its people, would they? Are you so sure?

“Marketers of conspiracies.... always lead with the doubt, always reinforce the doubt that we can't help but feel about just about everything.” Seth Godin.

Seth is absolutely correct. We need to awaken people by first getting them to doubt, to be sceptical, to question. And then we need to back it up with real facts, not some fictional accounts filled with pseudo science and obvious gaping holes.

Why are those who study conspiracy theories considered kooks, and why are ideas counter to the status quo considered taboo? Critical thinking, questioning, healthy scepticism (not pseudo-scepticism) are important in a society aspiring to be democratic. Every investigative journalist is a conspiracy theorist. Every historian. Every political scientist, every judge, every jury, every detective. Without our conspiracy theorists, conspirators will have a field day.

What kind of world do we want to live in? What kind of world do we want to create? Until we can approach these taboo subjects without mockery, and until we can solve the greatest crimes of this century (9/11, the Great Bank Heist of 2008) and bring the perpetrators to justice, we are headed more towards fascism than freedom.

D. L. Manley, 6th November, 2011.

*******************************************************

1 Cass Sunstein's paper on ‘Conspiracy Theory” sounds a lot like Orwell - speak.

2 Check out David Ray Griffin’s “Cognitive Infiltration”.

3 Pseudo scepticism refers to arguments which use scientific sounding language to disparage or refute given beliefs, theories, or claims, but which in fact fail to follow the precepts of conventional scientific scepticism, i.e., poor scientific reasoning.

The False dilemma scenario and the alleged 9/11 hijackers.

2011-11-27T15:56:00.000-08:00

When considering this ongoing argument between the identity of the parties that assumed control over the planes' flight paths, the false dilemma logical scenario applies:

Hijackers on board.

Remote Control.

Takeover of the planes

*

*

*

*

We have four logical possibilities here:

A: Neither hijackers, nor remote control.

B: Hijackers only.

C: Remote control only.

D: Both hijackers on board *AND* remote control.

I think we all agree that the "neither" option is highly unlikely, and can be pretty much ignored… but still exists as a logical possibility.

The "both" option, however, allows the perpetrators not only the best chance of success of the mission, but also a very strong and convincing story *with lots of physical and circumstantial evidence* (security cam videos, passports, DNA, phone calls from passengers, etc) that there were physical hijackers on board, while keeping the "remote control" aspect totally hidden. (Technology to control planes by remote has existed for decades, by the way).

As we know, since none of the alleged hijackers were anywhere near capable pilots, and the intended mission required considerable piloting skills (especially the final part of the flight path of AA77 into the Pentagon… a tight, precision 360º descent losing thousands of feet in altitude in a couple of minutes), there would have been a considerable risk, re. the success of the operation, that someone at the controls might have screwed up. Two of many possibilities that had to be avoided:
1. One or more of the the planes could have easily missed its target, thus having to fly in a large circle around the highly restricted and heavily monitored NYC or Washington DC area in order to have another go (thus greatly increasing the chances of being intercepted). Failing that, those in control might have been forced to crash or ditch their plane in a place where the wreckage would be easily found and examined...
2. One of the planes might have hit one of the Twin Towers a glancing blow with a wingtip and crashed spinning somewhere into a Manhattan street. This scenario would have left a huge set of clues and evidence .. a lightly damaged WTC Tower and a plane wreck which would have been closely examined in the aftermath. Such would have been an outcome that the planners should have gone to great lengths to avoid, especially given the "scientifically-proven-beyond-all-reasonable-doubt" conclusion that the Twin Towers were demolished with pre-placed explosives. (Examining a still standing WTC tower would have revealed the telltale evidence!). As it happened, three planes hit their targets full on, and very little remained, no persons survived to tell tales, and both the Twin Towers implosions' completely destroyed any incriminating macroscopic sized evidence of how they were taken down… exactly the most likely desired outcome.

It is quite possible that hijackers could have been drilled and trained, as patsies, without knowing the identity of their paymasters, but final control of the planes remained in the hands of personnel unknown, from a secure undisclosed location…..

***

As an afterthought: The (bizarre) crash of Egypt Air Flight 990 some 22 months prior to 9/11, in which the co-pilot was desperately fighting to regain control of his erratically and inexplicably behaving plane, was a most effective priming of the US (and world's) public of the notion of the "Islamic suicide Jihad pilot" into the individual and collective psyche. There is no evidence that the pilot in this case either wanted to commit suicide, or had any militant Islamic tendencies, or had any connections to al Qaeda/terrorist groups. I speculate here (don't we all on occasions in the 9/11 theater)….. but perhaps this was an experiment to determine how the remote takeover of a commercial plane could be executed, not only leaving no trace of remote control (apart from wild maneuverings), to also "educating" the public to the specter of Muslims who wanted to crash commercial planes and kill people. This accident occurred just off the US East Coast… how very, very convenient!

Pax Americana? Another piece of Orwellian doublespeak.

2011-11-16T16:08:00.000-08:00

Pax Americana? Wrong term... should be "Bellum Americanum".

The decades-long program of complex militarization, from 1945 to the present, involving the diversion of 10s of $Trillions from the tax-payers could surely never have come about by coincidence.

The relentless metastasizing of militarism into the economy is an endless corporate gravy-train, fed from the start by a broad-based (but groundless) paranoia - first regarding "the Russians" ... hellbent on attacking us because they "hate(d) our freedoms", and now, in the absence of the alleged "Soviet threat", we have "terrorists who are gungho to attack us because they also "hate our freedoms". Coincidence? Um, no.

The former never attacked the US - or anywhere in the West... (and hardly anyone else for that matter... they never had the motivation or the will). Sure, they put tanks on the streets in Prague in 1968, and 12 years later reluctantly marched into Afghanistan to help a relatively "progressive" government, and promptly got their asses kicked by the "Islamofascist"/CIA alliance. The latter, i.e. the alleged "terrorists" of recent years (members of that Islamic/CIA alliance, but now in disfavor) can't seem to be able to do anything barring the very occasional crude truck/car bomb, or the occasional ambitious kid, entrapped by the FBI trying to detonate their shoes or underwear with "bombs" incapable of exploding.... and carefully exploited by the media to convince the public that the "threat" is "real".

Wars are started and sustained by the successfully marketing, by the media-political alliance, of the justification for such... mostly imaginary, thus the broad use of bogus reasoning and fabricated events: Vietnam - Gulf of Tonkin (lies), Iraq: WMDs (lies). Afghanistan: 9/11 (lies) Gulf War 1990 - freeing the Kuwaiti people (sanctimonious bullshit), Libya - protecting the Libyan people (fraudulently misleading). And with the corporate media firmly entrenched in the militarization of the US economy, they will promote an imaginary threat as effectively as a real one, especially in the absence of the latter. And when the public are too stressed, working multiple jobs to make ends meet, or distracted by inconsequential trivia or "celebrity worship", or not wanting to jeopardize their 401Ks.... and Congress only answers to money (largely connected to militarization), the powers-that-be have a blank check to attack whoever they please, at a time of their choosing.

With an economy as militarized as the current US, then endless wars are essential to sustain the cancer and justify the astronomical spending. Comparing the jingoism of modern US, with that of the Soviet Bloc, is telling. How many full scale wars, police actions, border skirmishes and coups have the US started or gotten involved in over the last few decades, against nations or regimes that represented zero threat to the national security? I would be typing all afternoon to finish the list.

Are we safe? Look at the geography, and look at the number of times we have been attacked by foreign parties... not once since Pearl Harbor... and that was foreseen.

Are we ƒvcked yet?

Blair: the DOs and DON'Ts of democracy (yikes)

2011-11-11T12:32:00.000-08:00

That's quite a set of claims, coming from Tony Blair, of all people. Absolute shame on CNN for publishing this sanctimonious garbage and giving this low-life crook yet more exposure. Blair (aka "B. Liar") should have been arrested for treason and war crimes years ago, tried at the I.C.C. in The Hague, and should now be rotting in a jail cell somewhere, serving multiple consecutive life sentences, that is, if there was any semblance of real justice in the world.

Here we have a man who knowingly lied about Iraq's lack of "weapons of mass destruction", to garner public support for a series of wars, designed and planned PRIOR TO 9/11, to further enrich global polluters, banksters and corporate criminals. These $multi-trillion wars have resulted in the systematic slaughter of over 1.5 million innocent people, the trashing of the infrastructure of two sovereign nations, the permanent irradiation of huge areas for 4.2 billion years and thrown the world's economy into chaos. Here we have a man who prostituted himself to support the 'neocon' cadre of war criminals and thugs within the Bush administration, and now has the gall to moralize to the masses.

Here we have a man who personally vetoed a proper investigation into the worst terrorist attack on British soil -the London train and bus bombings on 7/7/2005 - making sure that vital evidence was withheld for up to 70 years from the public on bogus "national security consideration"... the get-out clause of all rogue politicians, by playing on the public's fear.

Here we have a man who more than likely authorized the cold-blooded assassination of Dr. David Kelly, the biological weapons expert whose scientific evidence threatened to derail the UK's involvement in, and support of, the US neoconservative endless war program.

This is the tip of the iceberg in the litany of evil in which Blair got immersed. Just like Dick Cheney, you can smell the sulfur by just reading the article.

If Tony Blair can call himself a "Christian", then it is no more absurd for me to claim that I am the Emperor of Japan.

9/11: What on Earth is up with Chomsky?

2011-11-07T09:48:00.000-08:00

Very shortly after 9/11 Noam Chomsky published a book on the subject. Unfortunately, it failed to address any of the evidence that flew in the face the official version.... and there was plenty even back at the time that should have raised the eyebrows of someone of Chomsky's intellect. If anyone would have done the research, Chomsky was the man. But he didn't. What would motivate one of the most formidable intellectuals of modern US history to write what was essentially a propaganda piece, abandoning his normally incisive sense of reason and logic, and instead, going for an unscientific story that relied on cherry-picking and ignoring the awkward evidence?

Even though this is speculative, Chomsky may well have had a "visitor or two", as regards how he should address the subject of 9/11. Chomsky has for decades commanded a huge degree of respect on the left of the political spectrum... and the establishment must have been aware that Chomsky was a potential major thorn in their side, had he followed his historical legacy of rigorous analytical methodology, and examined ALL the evidence. He was likely to have been considered someone who had to be "gotten on the side of the program, by whatever means necessary". In short, the old-fashioned Chomsky could have inspired the major movers and shakers on the American left to raise merry hell, and go up in arms about 9/11...in other words, a big unholy problem that had to be hastily addressed, maybe?

The most plausible reasons for Chomsky to abandon his long established style, a shift from precision to propaganda, are fear based. Perhaps he is afraid of being name-called a "conspiracy-theorist".. ..that little chestnut, despite being worn out and old as the hills, still has great persuasive power to straitjacket otherwise solid, especially intellectuals. Maybe he's scared of being name-called "anti-American", or unpatriotic? That also is a major stigma which reins in many people. Perhaps, by supporting the 9/11 Truth Movement, he felt that some would see him as being "pro-Muslim"... and right there is is a very powerful tool to get people on the straight and narrow; in US political circles, being "pro-Muslim/pro-Arab" is virtually equivalent to "Jew hater", or even "Holocaust denier"... or in Chomsky's case, a "self-hating Jew". Not pretty... and definitely worth avoiding. And we all know too well where much of the power base in Washington DC stands as regards Muslims... and thats downright ugly.

Chomsky's refusal to address 9/11 properly was likely a major factor in creating the taboo on the mainstream US left.., as is still in evidence in Democratic Underground., Huffington Post, The Nation, Amy Goodman, Mother Jones et al. In short we have the insanely illogical position of the US left being one of the pillars of the hard-line rightwing neoconservative policy set. Who would have ever thunked it?

Chomsky's recent take on the nanothermite issue is weird, in that the rambling, incoherent response is just not his style. Has Chomsky gotten senile? Somehow, I doubt that. Perhaps, despite his advancing years, he retains a sense of self preservation?

A famous quote from Chomsky is as follows:

"The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there's free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate."

In the case of 9/11, Chomsky is himself perhaps the unwitting victim re. the methodology of those who wish to keep the people "passive and obedient".

Anonymous: the Mexican Cartels to be targeted?

2011-10-31T19:18:00.000-07:00

The Anonymous hacker group is threatening to take a shy at the Mexican drug cartels. Go Anonymous! Unfortunately, the Mexican drug cartels have undoubted close links with US federal "law enforcement" and intelligence agencies.

Unfortunately, many people are clueless as to the workings and motivations of a certain federal law enforcement agency... think FBI, and a certain foreign intelligence agency... think CIA. Both agencies have a long and bloody history of involvement in massive drug running operations, toppling elected governments overseas, and instigating terrorist attacks at home. Nothing has changed for the better and there is no indication that these agencies have ceased maintaining their support for big crime. The top echelons of the Mexican (and other) cartels also enjoy absolute immunity... it's the street level guys who get busted, to make it superficially appear that the powers-that-be are trying to erase dangerous drugs from America's streets.

The bottom line, is what the big banks and Wall Street demand. Drug running is a vital component of the lifeblood of the major western banking industry: the traffic in illegal drugs is greater than the entire worldwide trade in all motor vehicles and textiles, combined; this is a vast amount of money, estimated at between $350 billion to $0.5 Trillion annually; putting a dent in this massive income stream will result in a bloodbath for whoever was responsible.

One of the main reasons for going to war in Afghanistan, was to depose the Taliban... but not the fabricated reasons stated by the administration of the time - "because they were harboring Osama bin Laden". They weren't. However, because their extremist version of Islam had resulted in Afghanistan's opium exports (formerly the world's largest grower), being virtually annihilated during 2001, certain household banking concerns' bottom lines were hit. Obviously this reason was not mentioned by the mainstream media, and linking Afghanistan to 9/11 was a ruse to mislead the American public and the rest of the world from the real purposes of the mission… oil and drugs.

Since the Afghanistan war was launched some 10 years ago, opium exports from Afghanistan quickly recovered, and now stand at record levels. Heroin (and hashish) flooded back onto the world markets. Following the money always leads to the truth. Mission accomplished

If Anonymous took on the Mexican cartels, such as Zeta, they would not only be targeted by these gangsters, but they would have the FBI, CIA and a host of other federal agencies after their blood as well. But, best of luck, guys! Go to it!

Julian Assange and Michael Moore... two of a kind?

2011-10-24T10:07:00.000-07:00

Wikileaks has not published a SINGLE SOLITARY DOCUMENT that has criminally implicated any member of government in any nation, or caused any major upset or policy change. The "worst" things that Wikileaks have brought to light have caused a few red faces, but that is the limit. If Wikileaks was really what Julian Assange claims, then why is he still a free man, giving interviews to the corporate media? How come he hasn't long been assassinated?

From where does Wikileaks receive its information? Why does it only publish this mostly harmless, relatively trivial material, as if it's of *huge significance*? If they came out with the new millennium's version of the Pentagon Papers, or something that implicated senior government officials in horrendous criminal acts (and we know that is rife in Washington DC).. then Wikileaks would have some credibility.

Wikileaks sounds *exactly*like a "limited hangout" operation. This is a time tested standard operating procedure by intelligence and security agencies all over the world, and US Central Intelligence are masters at it. Filter to the public a few relatively harmless tidbits of scandal or low level crime, or deviation from normal procedures, to conceal, or divert attention away, from crimes of far greater magnitude.

Michael Moore's movie Fahrenheit 9/11, a documentary which garnered massive public attention, was a variation on the "limited hangout" scenario. With the information available at the time of assembling the movie, Moore could have "nailed the Bush Administration to the wall", possibly even causing Bush to lose the 2004 presidential election, or even initiating serious criminal charges. Moore chose, unfortunately for America and the world, to "tone down" the movie from its explosively incendiary potential to mere "scandalous", with just a few interesting moments that made the audience furrow its collective brow... (for example, why were the bin Laden family members jetted out of the country before the FBI had a chance to interrogate them? etc. etc.).

Like most of us, Michael Moore probably has more of a sense of self-preservation than patriotism... and he stood to earn huge bucks from a "toned down version" with big distribution... which in the end did happen. The US government was placated, Moore was happy, and nothing to fire up the public was revealed to a mass audience: he just collated some interesting facts that had already been published in the mainstream media, but in a documentary with a timeline.

The Assange saga has similarities... he's not going to release anything that is going to endanger any US official, or institution.. because the information he receives is strictly filtered. In this way, the government remains happy, Assange remains alive, and in business, (although barely), and the status quo remains unruffled.

Meanwhile, the slaughter of innocents throughout the world, the trillion dollar crimes in high places, the serial corruption in "revered" institutions, and the complete lack of oversight and policing, continues uninterrupted, and the public reman blissfully unaware of the ugly realities below deck.

Calling all patriotic whistleblowers, your country needs you, badly. The American People are made of much sterner stuff than what the weasel media credits us with… We can handle the truth, whatever it is.

Dr. Steven E. Jones, a hero of our time.

2011-10-22T19:11:00.000-07:00

When Barack Obama was campaigning for presidency in 2008, he railed at the "politicization of science" under the prior administration (and before).

"I will restore the basic principle that government decisions should be based on the best-available, scientifically valid evidence and not on the ideological predispositions of agency officials or political appointees".

Unfortunately for us all, that promise was never honored. In the case of 9/11, the pledge was thrown to the ground in flames, squashed underfoot, and discarded into the nearest trash bin.

The politicization of science has (arguably) never been so flagrant, as regards to the official "investigations" into 9/11. What does it ultimately indicate about our society, when those who conduct honest science with results that are inconvenient to the credibility of the powers-that-be, get silenced, suspended, fired or worse?

Was NIST's study of the destruction of the World Trade Center submitted for an anonymous peer-review process, an essential part of scientific research? Apparently not.... it was more an establishment approved "decree" based on what was deemed politically "acceptable". If NIST had proceeded with the correct scientific method and taken *all* the evidence into consideration, they would have arrived at a different set of conclusions. But is it possible, in today's world, for a government agency to investigate an event like this, and publish conclusions that implicated elements within that same government? Or is that a redundant question?

The sole favorably peer reviewed studies, still unrebutted to this day, are those conducted by Dr. Jones and team, but they could only get published in the Bentham Open Forum... and in consequence, the editor in chief Ms. Marie-Paule Pileni resigned (or perhaps, was forced to resign?).

I watched an earlier version of Brett's movie in San Francisco at the Herbst Theater, on the afternoon of 9/11/2011. It tells the saga of a scientist of long standing repute and integrity who recognized that a monstrous lie had been foisted on the shocked-and-awed American people, and the rest of the world. For his efforts in the service of justice and truth, and arriving at conclusions that were scientifically sound but politically incendiary (pun intentional), Dr. Jones got the shaft from his BYU professorship.

In my book, Dr. Steven E. Jones should be awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the highest civilian decoration in the nation.

US troops out of Iraq by the end of 2011?

2011-10-21T10:44:00.000-07:00

Sounds like more verbal diarrhea from Pinocchiobama. The Iraq war started in 1990 and has been ongoing ever since, in various degrees of intensity. How realistic is it to put belief in the words of a man who has misled and lied to the American people since way before he was elected?

What has been achieved by the Iraq war since 2003? On the downside:

1. A net loss of $1.5 Trillion and more to the US economy, and contribution of the war(s) to the economic downturn at home.
2. The deaths of 5000 US troops, with many more thousands maimed for life. A continuing cost of $10s of billions to treat injured troops, for years after the war officially "ends".
3. The deaths of anything between 100,000 and 1.2 million Iraqi civilians, and the destruction of essential Iraqi infrastructure, much of which never got fixed. Widespread littering throughout the Iraqi countryside of unexploded bombs and cluster munitions which are still killing and maiming innocent people, mostly children.
4. Mass pollution of land and ground water by radioactive "depleted" uranium throughout Iraq, especially in S. Iraq, essentially for ever. (DU is an alpha-emitter with a half-life of over 4 billion years).
5. Worldwide distrust as regards the US government and its intentions. A greatly enhanced risk of retaliation and revenge attacks against US interests both at home and overseas.... middle easterners don't forget as quickly as we "attention-deficit affected, instant-gratification-addicted" westerners.

On the "upside":

1. Astronomical size profits for oil, "defense", security and surveillance corporations, many of whose senior executives have very close relations with powerful figures within the US government.
2. Our old thug-buddy Saddam Hussein was deposed and executed. The dictator is dead, long live the dictator.

That pretty much covers it.

Corporate America... The rotten apples destroying the whole crop

2011-10-17T10:11:00.000-07:00

There are TWO corporate Americas running side by side.

(A) The millions of small to medium size companies and sole proprietorships, doing real business, providing goods and services, competing in an open market. That is real free enterprise driven capitalism.

(B) Those (mostly big) businesses - especially the giant defense contractors - that pay little or no tax and exist through massive injections of government provided corporate welfare and government contracts at home and overseas. The HMOs which get between doctor and patient, and provide nothing except vastly inflated bills for their interference. The big banks that employ usury, extortion and illegal foreclosure practices.... and more. The big media giants which have become government lapdogs. The speculators who make $billions by moving money around, thus devaluing the currency and causing inflation.....
That is corporatism and crony capitalism, and is rife with corruption and crime.

Which version of corporate America does the reader support?

The Underwear "Bomber"... young FBI patsy kid turns traitor on us

2011-10-12T10:54:00.000-07:00

Abdulmutallab does a 180º: Suddenly without warning, he reverses his stance and pleads guilty on all charges.

This is frustrating and disappointing in the utmost, but not unexpected...

Lawyer Kurt Haskell's potential testimony must have been a real worry for the government... any of the jury members with an ounce of common sense would have realized that there were at least shenanigans afoot, and probably that Abdulmutallab was a naive kid who was deliberately set up by the FBI (and others). It was a real shame that Haskell's involvement was blasted all over the alternative media in advance of the trial, thus giving the government the heads up. They had to scramble quickly to avoid a black eye.

For any reader not familiar with the case, Kurt Haskell was a fellow passenger on NorthWest Flight 253, on December 25, 2009, and he observed, from close range, Abdulmutallab being carefully escorted through security by a sharply dressed man, whose identity remains unknown, despite the fact that the accused had a one way ticket, no passport.. in other words, stood out like the classic "sore thumb" as regards airplane security. There were a host of other anomalies observed by Mr. Haskell. The relevant airport security video remains "unavailable to public view" by order of the court.

Speculation time: The kid was probably offered a nice juicy carrot by the government (short sentence? new ID?), in return for a guilty plea. Young, naive Abdulmutallab jumped at it, on the advice of his lawyer, little aware that the enticement was nothing but hot air. In due course, he will realize he was duped, revert to his original stance and try to get another hearing. Before that happens, he will more than likely get "suicided" (ie murdered by some thug on the government's payroll), and the whole thing will be conveniently forgotten.

In the meantime, the unfortunate Mr. Haskell remains a marked man, probably for the rest of his life. The penalties that one can pay for being a patriotic American, a man prepared to confront the system with the Truth, have no bounds today. When law enforcement and other government agencies, and key personnel within them, have become so pathologically and terminally corrupt, what hope is there for our nation, apart from the people invoking the type of drastic, revolutionary action that former statesmen, such Washington, Jefferson and Lincoln, have mandated? The advice from leaders of infinitely greater wisdom and insight than the current batch of cheap shills for authoritarianism must never be forgotten.

Murder by Presidential Decree.

2011-10-10T22:46:00.000-07:00

The arbitrary killing by a remote controlled drone of a US citizen has set a new standard in how low our government has sunk. They are relying on the blind faith and support of a population so clueless, misinformed, misled and lied to, as regards terrorism. The shock and awe of 9/11 was the psychological hammer blow that destroyed our democracy in two hours on a sunny New York late summer morning, just over 10 years ago. This was the exact intention.. to soften up a population in order to easily push through an otherwise unsellable, extremist agenda.

Elements within our government can now, if they so desire, "inform" us that anyone they don't like, or disapprove of, whose opinions are out of line with the powers-that-be, or is a thorn in the side of authority, is a "terrorist", and thus can be terminated, by that same authority, at a time of their choosing. No evidence or proof is required, no verifiable chain of custody is required, and no trial is offered.

How many people have been murdered by executive order without a trial to determine their guilt or innocence? We don't know... we have no idea. The crew responsible are secretive beyond all bounds of paranoia, and the corporate "weasel" media is complicit in its Goebbels like appeasement.

Would you ever trust an executive branch that was so psychotic that such extreme methods were now the norm? BushCorp dumped Habeas Corpus, and now ObamaCorp has dumped the requirement for a trial, even a kangaroo military tribunal.

Does this sound like America? No. Does it sound like the old USSR, or Nazi Germany, or Myanmar, or Iran on steroids? Undoubtedly yes... on an increasing number of counts. How did we fall so far, in such a short time?

Alex Jones

2011-10-03T17:01:00.000-07:00

Alex Jones has morphed from a bona fide activist, into a hybrid of rock star and opportunist. Although he still puts out some valuable content, mostly aligned towards the libertarian part of the political spectrum, he now appears to be owned, or partially owned by the very system that he used to rail against, and now *pretends* to rail against. As he has currently has carved out a most lucrative career in the media business, the powers-that-be have likely considered him "too big, with too much reach, not to be a part of them". As a result, he has probably been given certain boundaries that he is not permitted to transgress, in order to maintain his career status and the viability of his business, without harassment. Who needs harassment?

Alex Jones was one of the great voices for 9/11 Truth, but now he barely gives lip service. Perhaps the reality about 9/11, and its political ramifications, is considered too sensitive and threatening to the status quo for larger alternative media sources (such as infowars.com or prisonplanet.com) to be permitted to cover without some form of filtering, or moderating influence. In effect Alex Jones is well on the way to joining the taboo on 9/11 which exists within the corporate media, and the leading "left" (!) media, such as Democracy Now and the Huffington Post.

Despite his star status, Alex Jones is by no means immortal. Maybe he is becoming more aware of hat basic sense of self-preservation as he gets older, like most people. He cares for his family, like most people. He's worked hard for his business, like any businessperson who starts an enterprise from scratch. In other words, he's very comfortable, and deserves that reward. He's put in a lot of time and effort, and perhaps he feels he's done his community service and apprenticeship, at some risk to his person as well. Perhaps, on account of where he is now and the awareness he has re. the murderous and psychopathic nature of certain parties within the topmost ranks of the US power structure, that he is not too keen on to following the likes of Barry Jennings, Sen. Paul Wellstone and many others terminated on account of their inconvenience, into a place where they cant cause any trouble. Who can blame him?

So, sadly, perhaps Alex Jones is now toeing their line, in his own bull-horning fashion. He has become a parody of himself, just like Mick Jagger, who still sings songs railing against the establishment, now as a fully-fledged member of that same establishment. It's human nature at work here, no conspiracy required.

Anwar al Awliki... his fate, anyone's fate.

2011-10-01T11:35:00.002-07:00

Anwar al Awlaki was MURDERED without a trial. What does that mean? Think about it, before jerking your knees about "terrorism".

Without a trial, his involvement in terrorist attacks remains UNKNOWN. For all we know, he may be entirely innocent. That is a fact, even if it violates our media-programmed and conditioned comfort zones. The only things we have to go on, are pronouncements in the corporate media, echoing the words of the intelligence community and the US military. But here's the huge problem: The Central Intelligence Agency has long ceased to be a national asset (if it ever was, that is), but is now a monstrous $50 billion a year liability, which for decades has lied serially about numerous events abroad, brought the good name of the US into such disrepute via the funding, arming and general support of the most evil and violent regimes throughout the world.

Similarly, the FBI.. … which appears in the latest revelations published in salon.com, to organize terror attacks by enticing and training young, naive, teenage Muslim boys to commit acts of terror for reward. Then the agency "busts" the kid(s) and then trumpets their "success" to the corporate media, which in turn terrorizes the public with stories of "terrorists trying to kill us wherever we go" ... without even investigating these incidents to report on their real nature.

Then, think about the reality of terrorism. If "al Qaeda" was the threat that has been force-fed to us by government and the weasel media in full-on "knee-pad" mode, then where are the attacks? Comparing with the Provisional IRA, which was a genuine, "bona fide" terrorist group, with funding provided, ironically from the US, they bombed low security targets in the UK and Europe on a daily basis, killing thousands and injuring 10s of thousands over a 25 year period. Incidentally, Rep. Peter King (R, NY) was one of the IRA's chief funders.. and now he sits on a powerful Homeland Security congressional committee. Go figure... a terrorist in DC! (One of many). Whats next...

What is the comparative activity in the US courtesy of those foreigners who allegedly "hate our freedoms"? To build a bomb and hit low security, or "soft" targets, is child's play.. ask any of the hundreds of thousands of young lads in this country with a penchant for home-made "chemistry experiments. In other words, if its easy for a kid, then its "child's play" for a real terrorist with paramilitary training and hate in his heart...

......but nothing is happening. Nobody is bombing our malls, theaters, sports facilities, libraries, trains, buses and infrastructure. Is it because it's too easy? Is it because security has become so efficient? Ha! Maybe, perhaps, these pesky Arabs prefer a challenge, a real tussle with authority? Maybe, they feel they have to go for the highest security places, namely *airports*, with "bombs" that are incapable of exploding, or devices so small and ineffectual (such as the alleged shoe bomber or underwear bomber) that they could were only capable of perhaps setting fire to the would be jihadist's clothing, let alone bringing down a jumbo jet. And both these incidents were set up by the FBI, as mentioned in the previous paragraph. .. as was the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. Google: Emad Salem. There you will find out what really happened that morning 18 years ago… and the FBI's complicity.

The few attacks attributed to "al Qaeda" were the 1990s bombings of the US embassies in Africa and the USS Cole.... (the latter was arguably not a "terrorist" incident because the target was a military asset). Then, we have 9/11. This huge and world shattering event was totally out of pattern for anything previously attributed to "al Qaeda"... and placed them in "terrorist superstar" status.. Shock and Awe® was accomplished in a matter of 90 minutes, via a series of media broadcast events, unfolding in real time… in great detail. That morning, those alleged 19 young men with little or no military training and lousy piloting abilities, managed to run rings around the most powerful military/law enforcement/intelligence network, in its own back yard, without even a hint of a response. Then in the process, these 19 apparent wizards managed to knock down 3 buildings with 2 (two!) planes, and to add insult to injury and mass murder, they violated 4 of the most fundamental laws of physics in the process. Then the government refused to investigate what happened for 411 days, and when it did, the inquiry was railroaded, starved of funding and had little time to finish. Who was being protected here? al Qaeda agents, of course. (?!!)

I hope we all get the point. America has been hijacked, not by Muslim militants, but by a small, rogue, well-connected element within our own military/intelligence community... and our huge lumbering government is not fulfilling its responsibilities in bringing everyone who was responsible to justice. Muslims are the designated "bete noir", because that is what Americans have been conditioned to believe for decades. No wonder the powers that be have had such an easy job of selling the 9/11 official conspiracy theory yarn... it was what we WANTED to believe.

And similarly with Anwar al Awliki. Because he has been designated as "boogeyman du jour", mainstream media reading Americans do not require *evidence* that he was guilty of anything. Just the fact he has an Arabic name sells it neatly…..

Think about it. And, given that the government has now set the dangerous precedent that anyone... especially people who question the government, like this poster here, can be designated as a terrorist, and terminated without question…..

That could mean YOU too.

Anwar al Awliki... his fate, anyone's fate.

2011-10-01T11:35:00.001-07:00

Anwar al Awlaki was MURDERED without a trial. What does that mean? Before jerking the knees, think about it, before jerking your knees about "terrorism".

That could mean YOU too.

Palestinian statehood....

2011-09-23T18:05:00.001-07:00

On account of the current position outlined by Washington DC, it has become abundantly clear that the US (government, not the US people) has had NO INTENTION of *EVER* supporting a Palestinian state. The truth is now out, after Abbas forced the US hand, following three decades of duplicity, hypocrisy, false promises and LIES.

The US government only appears to wish subjugation and hatred upon the people of the occupied territories, the West Bank and Gaza. Washington DC is apparently owned by hardliners sympathetic to the creation of a "Greater Israel" in the mid east, by force, terrorism, war and violence, and as long as the US war machine keeps making huge profits from the continuation of broad scale human misery, nothing will change.

Israel and Palestine....

2011-09-20T09:55:00.000-07:00

The rampant, paranoid, institutionalized Islamophobia and Arab-hating that prevails in Washington DC is all apparent, yet again. Hardline Republicans such as Perry, the US equivalent of the Taliban, just don't get it.

How many more times do we have to repeat: Netanyahu and the Likudnuiks are *NEVER* prepared to negotiate peace terms with Palestinians, regardless of who is representing "Palestine".

The United States government, regardless of party affiliation is fully aware of such, and is in TOTAL default agreement with Netanyahu and/or the Israeli government.The US continues to assure senior Israeli officials, privately, that "The United States will NEVER support statehood for Palestine, under *any* circumstances, or until Hamas, or any derivative of Hamas ceases to exist, and "any attempt to by the P.A. to blindside Israel using the United Nations or any other international party will be met with an automatic veto from the U.S. ambassador to the U.N."

There you have it. Nothing is going to change for the better, and those wishing for formalized peaceful relations between Israel and a Palestinian state "will have to wait a very long time, probably longer than they can expect to be alive".

On Hurricane Katrina's 6th Anniversary: Hurricane Irene.

2011-08-30T20:43:00.000-07:00

The much hyped Hurricane Irene failed, thankfully, to live up to its potential of causing cataclysmic scale loss of life and destruction on the East Coast. We dodged a bullet this time, although the weakened storm was potent enough to kill over 40 and cause $10 billion+ in damage. The relatively limited scale of loss and damage didn't cause the world's people to rush to our aid; thankfully, we could manage the aftermath without putting too much of a strain on an already stressed economy.

This was a far cry from the catastrophe that was Hurricane Katrina. While the storm was still raining itself out over the mid-west, two of the first countries to offer aid were Cuba and Iran. The pledges from these two 'enemy nations' were the largest international aid packages offered to help the United States in its time of distress. Iran offered to send humanitarian aid and 20 million barrels of crude oil (worth >$1,000,000,000), and Cuba offered to send 1,586 doctors and 26 tons of medicine.

The aid from both Cuba and Iran was rejected by the State Department. Also, before the 2006 World Baseball Classic, Cuba said they would donate their share of the winnings to Katrina victims to ensure the United States embargo against Cuba was not violated. However, after the tournament, the U.S. government refused to allow the donation.

In other words, the Bush Administration was so bloody-minded, arrogant and plain evil that they preferred to allow our own citizens to needlessly suffer, than accept two extraordinarily generous offers from two demonized nations, and start a diplomatic recovery. The shame, the disgrace, the incompetence, and the sheer cowardice of the US government displayed in the week of infamy that followed Katrina's landfall in Mississippi and Louisiana, was breathtaking. And to make a bad situation as bad as it could have possibly become, reliable sources including the New Orleans coroner and the Red Cross have reported that many hundreds of people who were found dead by rescuers had not actually died from drowning: they had been shot, execution style, by a single bullet to the back of the head, before falling into the water. Apparently, thugs (read terrorists) from the Blackwater Corporation, now "Xe", perhaps hired by the Department of Homeland Security to help police New Orleans in the wake of the storm, had fired on people, trapped by floodwaters, at close range.

In the case of a future major catastrophe like Katrina, it would be of little surprise if some nations shy away from offering help go the US, knowing the kind of response delivered by some of our more psychotic officials.

The Great Deceivers, Part 92,347,641

2011-08-30T10:47:00.000-07:00

How much do we really know about Libya? Unless you live there, little or next to nothing. Especially if one is a consumer of the drivel and lies put out by the "son of Goebbels" US/UK corporate media.

If you believe that what you see on television as reality, ignore the clip below:

LINK HERE!!!!!

The extract supposedly from Libya is a shot from a demonstration in India, (specifically the Ramlila Maidan parade ground in New Delhi) in which supporters of Anna Hazare were demonstrating against government corruption.

Perhaps the BBC had no footage from Libya that conformed with what they WANTED to show. The management at the BBC seems to regard its viewership as idiots, and wouldn't notice that the demonstrators are waving the flag of India, not Libya. The caption on the Indian footage was edited out and replaced with "Live From Tripoli". This re-editing required effort, direction and intent to deceive... in other words, "incompetence" can be safely eliminated.

The BBC is regarded worldwide as a reasonably authoritative news service. (!) Here is the stark evidence that they are no different to Fox, CNN, ABC, MNSBC, CBS, CBC, and the rest of the propaganda network that services organized violence. Here, they are servicing NATO, al Qaeda (CIA) and the true axis of evil.

Do you still believe what you see on "the news"?

Who controlled the planes on 9/11?

2011-08-25T09:54:00.000-07:00

When considering this ongoing argument between the identity of the parties that assumed control over the planes' flight paths, the false dilemma logical scenario applies:

We have four logical possibilities here:

A: Neither hijackers, nor remote control.
B: Hijackers only.
C: Remote control only.
D: Both hijackers on board *AND* remote control.

I think we all agree that the "neither" option is highly unlikely, and can be pretty much ignored… but still exists as a logical possibility.

The "both" option, however, allows the perpetrators not only the best chance of success of the mission, but also a very strong and convincing story *with lots of physical and circumstantial evidence* (security cam videos, passports, DNA, phone calls from passengers, etc) that there were physical hijackers on board, while keeping the "remote control" aspect totally hidden. (Technology to control planes by remote has existed for decades, by the way).

As we know, since none of the alleged hijackers were anywhere near capable pilots, and the intended mission required considerable piloting skills (especially the final part of the flight path of AA77 into the Pentagon… a tight, precision 360º descent losing thousands of feet in altitude in a couple of minutes), there would have been a considerable risk, re. the success of the operation, that someone at the controls might have screwed up. For some of many possibilities: one or more of the the planes could have easily missed its target, thus having to fly in a large circle around the NYC or Washington DC area in order to have another go (thus greatly increasing the chances of being intercepted). Or perhaps, one of the planes might have hit one of the Twin Towers a glancing blow with a wingtip and crashed spinning somewhere into a Manhattan street. This scenario would have left a huge set of clues and evidence .. a lightly damaged WTC Tower, and a plane wreck which could have been closely examined in the aftermath. Such would have been an outcome that the planners should have gone to great lengths to avoid, especially given the "scientifically-proven-beyond-all-reasonable-doubt" conclusion that the Twin Towers were demolished with pre-placed explosives. (Examining a still standing WTC tower would have revealed the telltale evidence!). As it happened, three planes hit their targets full on, and very little remained, no persons survived to tell tales, and both the Twin Towers implosions' completely destroyed any incriminating macroscopic sized evidence of how they were taken down… exactly the most likely desired outcome.

***

How we are all manipulated by lies and framing, by the powers that be.

2011-08-02T20:53:00.000-07:00

8 Reasons why Young Americans Don't Fight Back: How the US Crushed Youth Resistance.

Excellent article, and sadly for us all, so relevant.

One thing left out: the absence of a military draft. Back in the days of Vietnam, it was the presence of the military draft that triggered the mass mobilization in university campuses against another war that was started on the basis of falsehoods. Had the lies surrounding the Gulf of Tonkin aspect been widely known back then the anti-war effort would have been even stronger than it was. The chief motivating factor was that most students were not keen to compulsorily put their lives on the line for a war that, even without the Tonkin factor, was never justified by the government in terms of defending America and its Constitution.

Regarding the importance of television in pacifying the masses, there is a striking example of this in the UK in the mid 1970s. Inflation in Britain was running at some 25%, and the UK government, by law, imposed a wage increase ceiling of 5% per annum to try to combat inflation. The (then) militant trade unions adhered to this rule until one group decided to challenge it: the broadcast engineers union demanded a 15% pay hike and threatened industrial action unless this demand was met. There were only three TV stations in the UK at the time (BBC1, BBC2 and ITV) and the prospect of the great pacifier, television, suddenly ceasing to exist scared the authorities into making damned sure that the engineers gpt what they wanted. Sure enough, they got their 15% pay rise via a technicality/loophole to get around the law, thus ensuring that the great sedative remained on tap. (Heaven forbid if people actually started talking to each other!).

There is a quote from Wiliiam Colby the former Director of US Central Intelligence: "The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." (By owns, he probably meant "have some degree of content placement/control"). The intelligence community is very well versed in the huge part that the (corporate) media plays in shaping the collective public awareness, and the importance of media control when it comes to "educating" (read manipulating and lying to) the public as regards "broadcastable" matters of national security, especially the greatest fearmongering tool of them all, terrorism. Which brings us to this:

One area in which the CIA and other government agencies have had a huge stake, is Hollywood and the movie/entertainment industry. Author Jack Shaheen brilliantly documents this decades long program of deliberate indoctrination in his landmark encyclopedic book Reel Bad Arabs: How Hollywood Vilifies a People in which he systematically catalogs how Arabs (and by extension, Muslims) have been universally and relentlessly framed by Hollywood and the US entertainment industry as "evil," "uncivilized", "violent" and pretty much every and any negative trait which can be arbitrarily lobbed at one group. I mention this particular instance of indoctrination and institutionalized racism because there is a strong 9/11 factor here: The perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks were undoubtedly aware that as a result of this decades long program to brainwash the US public that "all Muslims and Arabs are evil", it became very easy to sell the "radical Islamic" aspect of 9/11.. because that is exactly what Americans WANTED to hear.... it was an explanation that conformed neatly with their preprogrammed comfort zone.... even when a big steaming heap of B.S. and lies.

This preconceived notion in the collective US psyche enabled the 9/11 perpetrators some wiggle room, as regards potential errors/foul-ups as regards the execution of the attacks, which, as we all know, did happen... and I would bet that they were aware of this :"room for error" factor and planned accordingly. So, even in the absence of solid facts to blame the designated guilty party/parties, and in the presence of proven facts which point directly at *other* parties, there was still enough distrust of "the dark skinned Muslim/Arab middle easterner" to sell the idea to a dumbed down, corporate media infected public. Even otherwise rational people have swallowed this toxic brand of koolaid.

Norway: Terrorism or Violence?

2011-07-29T11:09:00.001-07:00

The US right wing, and the corporate media kneepad drones who answer to them, are really spinning the terminology.

If the person who killed 80 or so people in Norway was a Muslim, the Press would have declared him as a terrorist. For now though, he is just an 'assailant', 'attacker' (Reuters), 'gunman' (BBC, CNN & Al Jazeera).

The US State Department calls it an 'Act of Violence', Not an 'Act of Terrorism'. Well, well.

LInks:

http://blogs.state.gov/index.php/site/entry/bombing_in_oslo_norway

http://samaa.tv/newsdetail.aspx?ID=34460

http://secretaryclinton.wordpress.com/

http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2011/07/168986.htm

Looks like the term 'Terrorist ' is reserved for Muslims and Arabs? Is AIPAC (etc) *that* influential? I guess so.

Now, imagine if the bomber/shooter had been Palestinian or, heaven forbid, Iranian: Iranian? Terrorism, terrorism, terrorism, terrorism, terrorism, terrorism, terrorism, terrorism,terrorism, TERRORISM, terrorism. T e r r o r i s m, TERRORISM. TERRORISM...

Get the reality?

Norway: Terrorism or Violence?

2011-07-29T11:09:00.000-07:00

ow, imagine if the bomber/shooter had been Palestinian or, heaven forbid, Iranian: Iranian? Terrorism, terrorism, terrorism, terrorism, terrorism, terrorism, terrorism, terrorism,terrorism, TERRORISM, terrorism. T e r r o r i s m, TERRORISM. TERRORISM...

Get the reality?

Norway: "all Muslims, all the time". Uh oh. Ooops.

2011-07-25T12:39:00.000-07:00

All the mainstream US corporate media jumped on their infantile Islamophobia-evangelism bandwagon of "all terrorists are Muslims", without a shred of evidence or proof. To much of the US population who only read the corporate media headlines, they probably now think that Muslims were responsible, and those who habitually read the extreme rightwing blogs and listen to hate radio had the "Muslims did it" opinion firmly lodged into their heads as soon as the news came out. On sampling the comments sections on CNN, Yahoo and the rest of the mainstream network sites, the sheer proportion of anti-Arab, anti Islamic hate and bile in the US is truly incredible.

A similar thing happened during the anthrax attacks of October 2001: in the wake of 9/11, the mainstream corporate media were gleefully expounding the Muslim angle, on account of the "anti-Israel" messages posted by the perpetrators. When it was discovered that the anthrax had originated from the Ft. Detrick, MD, biological weapons facility, and it was discovered that "al Qaida" and "Arabs" had nothing to do with it, the story disappeared, from "all anthrax all the time", to a roaring silence in the media and government. Obviously, the anthrax attacks was clearly intended as a false flag event, by enemies of Islam, designed to blame Muslims. And it worked.

The neoconservative element that exerts disproportional influence in Washington DC via hardline pro-Israeli think tanks, and stacked the previous Bush administration to the rafters, and has been largely responsible for shaping popular anti-Arab, anti-Muslim hatred, especially in the US heartland. The terrorist who murdered so many people in Norway last week got much of his influence and "inspiration" from the same ideological group that launched the so-called "war on terrorism", and required an event like 9/11 (also blamed on Arabs and Muslims

Anthrax: FBI debunked by DoJ (?!!)

2011-07-20T16:53:00.000-07:00

A story of paramount importance has recently been aired in the semi-mainstream media: It looks as if the FBI's insistence on the "guilt" of deceased anthrax "suspect" Dr. Bruce Ivins is a big lie. What a surprise (roll eyes).

In addition to this new revelation from the DoJ, let us now state the obvious:

The two chemical and biological agents, nanothermite and weaponized anthrax spores that played a major part in the 9/11 and anthrax attacks respectively have several characteristics in common:

*Both substances originated from secure US government/military run laboratories. 

*Both substances are manufactured by state of the art industrial procedures, in laboratories equipped with the latest, most modern equipment, which is (presumably) expensive to manufacture and only obtainable by organizations with specific permits etc.

 *Both materials were manufactured in facilities with the tightest security, on account of the potential danger. 

*Both attacks were blamed on Muslims and Arabs... the involvement of Muslims in the anthrax attacks was sharply dropped from the news (as was the entire story) when it was discovered that "al Qaeda" had nothing to do with it.

 *One can very safely assume that both materials were not accessible to non-credentialed people with middle eastern names.

If we can find the real perps of the anthrax attacks via a full, no-holds barred investigation with full subpoena power, there is the road that will likely lead us to the real 9/11 terrorists. It's hardly a wonder that Obama and the powers-that-be are scrambling desperately to put a lid on this. "Suspect" Dr. Bruce Ivins was clearly railroaded, and could easily have defended his innocence in court, should he have been allowed a hearing. But he was not so lucky: Most conveniently for the authorities, he died (in suspicious circumstances), as did the unfortunate Barry Jennings, a most NYC official who testified to witnessing multiple explosions and stepping over numerous dead bodies in the lobby of WTC 7 on the morning of 9/11/2001.

"Impeach" is too good for what it appears that Obama may likely be guilty of. The facts suggests that he is using his position of chief executive to personally obstruct justice from being served. By going to these lengths to protect terrorists, he has dragged the White House and the office of president down to the level of "harboring terrorists".

Similarly, the 441 day stonewalling by the Bush Administration to prevent any inquiry into 9/11 was also an attempt to prevent justice from being served, and the sham of an inquiry that was finally authorized under the guise of "independent" was a continuation of that obstruction.

If America could somehow rein in the thugs and get them to an interrogation table, we may be able to change course, by popular demand, and save the country from its precipitous, headlong rush towards totalitarianism.

Fukushima.. the censorship of news in the US continues apace....

2011-07-09T21:21:00.000-07:00

Article here on yahoo news:

"No reports of abnormalities at the Fukushima plant". WTF???? OMG. These crazy lying scumbag corporate ass-hats at Tepco should be lined up and shot. They are beyond all belief. It is incredible, UNBELIEVABLE, what the corporate media weasels are telling us... it is obvious that the nuclear power industry is completely in control of the news media, and the source of the lies they are spreading on account of major PR damage control. To be generous, perhaps the writer of the article should have said "no NEW anomalies" on account of the latest shaking. But the word "anomalies" is a ridiculously inappropriate euphemism for what was one of the worst nuclear disasters in history… It's the equivalent of describing the weather in Hurricane Katrina's eye wall as "breezy conditions". Typical Associated Press amateur hour "journalism".

Much of the Fukushima plant was trashed in the tsunami following the quake, and 3 of the 6 reactors underwent a total meltdown. Up to 600,000 highly radioactive spent fuel rods, stored *on the roof* (!!!!!!) of the reactor buildings were blasted up to 2 miles from the site by several massive hydrogen-oxygen explosions which destroyed the top levels of 3 of the facility's 6 reactor buildings. Radiation is still leaking completely out of control, the seawater around the plant is radioactive and contamination has spread 200 miles inland, the ground water is radioactive, radioactive isotopes are in the soil and there's still an exclusion zone for miles around the facility.

Surely someone must have noticed that after intensive media coverage for the first 2 weeks, when the Fukushima aspect of the earthquake/tsunami disaster was getting worse by the day, suddenly it disappeared off the TV screens, radio and newspapers, as if by magic, or as if someone had flipped a switch. This is utterly reminiscent of the October 2001 Anthrax attacks: When it was discovered that the anthrax originated, not from some clandestine "al Qaeda" mobile laboratory, but instead from the bioweapons research facility at Ft. Detrick, MD, what happened? The corporate media, in "all anthrax, all the time" mode, dropped the story at a stroke.

The Fukushima disaster is on a par with the 1986 Chernobyl catastrophe… and many US nuclear plants are of a similar design to that of Fukushima. There is one reason that the nuclear power industry is supported so vehemently in the US, despite the expense of operating the 104 remaining plants, and the astronomical cost involved in decommissioning those that are ending their lifecycle. Two words: WEAPONS, and WAR…

After greed and materialism, VIOLENCE is the U.S. national religion.

The new yellow journalism: Goebbels would be proud

2011-06-20T11:11:00.000-07:00

Much of what we hear in the corporate media, as regards controversial events for example, war and terrorist events, is single sourced, for example, a particular government spokesman, or a particular government agency. The Iraq war of 2003, and the 9/11/2001 terror attacks were prime examples.

In the case of the Iraq war, the entire corporate media took government pronouncements on Saddam Hussein's alleged "weapons of mass destruction" as a religious truth which cannot be denied. All the networks featured an endless procession of self-proclaimed experts and pundits, retired colonels and generals, defense analysts, Pentagon officials, White House propagandists, politicians on both "sides" of the aisle, defense sector spokespeople and more, all touting material that was known to be 100% false. What was even worse, is that the actuality of Iraq's 100% lack of WMDs, was already known by everyone in the relevant circles of those promoting the war. Philip Zelikow even admitted such, when asked about the reasoning behind choosing "WMDs" as the rationale for invasion: making a case for WMDs was the best option to achieve consensus. The story put forward by the man known as "Curve Ball" was known to be false, and he was known to be an unreliable witness with criminal tendencies. The Iraq war was largely "justified" and started on the basis of this one story, known to be false, from one person: A single, dishonest source, and the corporate media, in true Goebbels-wannabe obedience, regurgitated it in lockstep. 4500 American soldiers and 500,000+ Iraqi civilians were killed, and defense contractors made a killing, and the American people paid $1.2 trillion as a result this stack of corporate-media/government single sourced garbage.

As regards news from the Middle East in general, even many of the translations are being single sourced: MEMRI is the organization used by the US corporate media to translate most of what we hear from the region, from Arabic or Farsi or other language/dialect, to English. MEMRI, as has become well-known, has a very checkered history as regards accuracy, and an intent to fool or mislead readers.

Just as controversially, as regards 9/11, what we have all heard, and led to believe as the infallible truth, is as a result of the long, protracted, and detailed phone calls, allegedly sent from passengers about the alleged hijackers, most especially the infamous call to former Solicitor General Ted Olson from his wife Barbara, who was allegedly on AA Flight 77 when it allegedly hit the Pentagon. However, according to the FBI (referencing the case transcript in the trial of the alleged 20th hijacker Zararias Moussouai), *zero* cell phone calls were connected from Flight 77, and specifically, none as regards the case of Barbara and Ted Olson. Furthermore, according to a study of cellphone connectivity from the air by a certain Professor A. K. Dewdney, it was highly unlikely that any of the alleged phone calls could have been successfully connected as alleged, since the technology to do just that did not exist in 2001. The first reliable "in-air cellphone technology" was demonstrated by Qualcomm in 2004, a full three years later.

In other words, the entire backbone of the version of events on 9/11, relayed to us via the corporate media is not just single sourced, but also hearsay. It appears that we tend to give credence to versions of events that fit our comfort zone, and the art of not just journalism, but also how we write history is being poisoned for the sake of convenience, or worse. The corporate media, in the mandate to appear superficially 'patriotic'... a government lapdog as opposed to watchdog.... appears to have become no more reliable than a very well sponsored and far reaching blogger.

Bob Graham: "Keys to the KIngdom".

2011-06-11T15:31:00.000-07:00

Link to Senator Bob Graham's new book here.

Is it *POSSIBLE* for not just Bob Graham, but *any* Washington DC insider, especially entrenched incumbents, to come out with what they really know? This does not just apply to 9/11, but many other (lesser) controversies which, in a world with any semblance of justice, would prompt full unbiased, independent investigations, and nail the perps to the wall, no mater how privileged or influential they were.

When one is deep in the DC club, the last thing one dares to do is shop your extended family and associates, regardless of which side of the political aisle they adhere. We all know what happens to whistleblowers, especially in the new post 9/11 world. Keeping mum is the 12th Commandment in DC... the 11th being "thou shalt not get caught". "National security" is a catch-all excuse to keep information away from the scrutiny of the unwashed masses; however rather than "national", the security about which they are far more concerned, is their own personal security and that of their associates.

By rights, anyone who was in talks with the alleged paymaster to the alleged 9/11 hijackers, on the day it all happened, *should* have attracted droves of FBI agents to question, in depth, everyone in that meeting which (if Mohamed Atta had anything to do with the attacks other than as convenient patsy), could have easily resulted in charges of at least "accessory-before-the-fact" to mass murder, a crime that carries a similar penalty as that handed out to the actual perpetrators. How much more damning do circumstances have to get, in order for the Feds to act?

The DC political machine is a self-regulating entity, effectively compartmentalized by its inbuilt hierarchy and rules as a self-protection mechanism. And as we all must surely be aware, self-regulation works as effectively in the pursuit of justice as in, for examples, the police investigating the police, the Mafia investigating the Gambino family (!), a study of the health effects of GM foods funded by the Monsanto corporation, or... most blatantly of all, the Bush Administration's hardline neoconservative appointee Philip Zelikow in charge of the 9/11 commission's so-called "investigation".

Bob Graham, IMHO, has no choice but to follow what is open to him... and the same goes for any other DC insider who have written about this (and other) topics. He obviously knows a lot more than he is telling, but he doesn't know enough to effectively blow the whistle and name names, without being hung out to dry, roundly ignored, or castigated as a conspiracy nut, no matter how much integrity the man has.

Like any other person, Senator Graham has a sense of self-preservation. In DC (as in so many areas of political and corporate life), pragmatism trumps principle every time.

WTC Building 7's destruction... and Muslims?!! ?!!

2011-06-07T10:47:00.000-07:00

The campaign to spread a broad awareness of the destruction of WTC 7 (via explosives being a virtual certainty) is of vital importance, because it annihilates the connection between the "militant Islamic" story and the actual events of 9/11... that is, unless "militant Islamic" personnel gained access to WTC7 (and WTC 1 and 2) prior to 9/11, thus bypassing WTC security on a long term basis. (!)

This (and almost all other aspects of 9/11 truth) gives rise to a challenging and uncomfortable situation for many: If the government's story is an elaborate fabrication... and it appears to be exactly that, on multiple counts... then the sole involvement of Muslims in the event was their being deliberately framed, by others, as unfortunate patsies.

So, one of the questions we must ask, is not only "who did it?", but why did the perpetrators decide to focus their provably false claims against *Muslims/Arabs*? What was their motivation for such framing... religious hatred? racism? the ease by which they could sell the "Muslims did it alone" story to preconditioned Americans?

The blame issue could be a vital element in solving 9/11, but its a place where few people... even prominent 9/11 truth leaders... are prepared to tread, on account of sensitivity to political correctness.

Netanyahu and his buddies in the US Congress

2011-05-24T10:14:00.000-07:00

It's quite obvious why Netanyahu received such a rapturous reception in Congress: A large slice of the powers-that-be in DC are Islamophobic, to the point of believing that "the only good Arab is a dead one, and every Palestinian person is a terrorist or potential terrorist".

The US/Israeli DC alliance never wants peace, unlike the huge majority of Israelis, because they are profiting handsomely from the unrest. Similarly, Hamas doesn't want peace either, as their thugs are getting a cash lifeline from Iran and other Arab states.

The US, unfortunately, is committed to the continuation of the fate of hundreds of thousands of exiled Palestinian families who have been living a horrendous concentration-camp like existence for decades in Lebanese and Jordanian "refugee camps", having been thrown out of their homes and off their land, at gunpoint, in 1948.

Peace is impossible under the current circumstances, and any US brokered "peace talks" are a cynical way of getting the public to think that "we are doing the right thing". The only way of looking at this fiasco is the usual one: "follow the money, and see where it leads".

Talking about money, there is one thing that stands out here, which is hardly mentioned: the Arab world is clueless as regards how to deal with the US. Rather than spend so much energy and time getting militant about Israel, they should learn to do what the Israelis have mastered: the art of bribing Congress. How many $tens of billions of oil revenue could be used to make inroads into turning the US into a powerful ally, rather than the object of their hate?

FBI: protecting, NOT prosecuting, the 9/11 and anthrax killers.

2011-05-22T21:25:00.000-07:00

There is some very significant news concerning the late Dr. Bruce Ivins, the scientist who was framed by the FBI for "involvement" in the October 2001 anthrax attacks which killed 5 people and hospitalized many more. (Anthrax was also sent to senior Democrats including Senator Tom Daschle). Dr. Ivins died in suspicious circumstances, another in a long string of highly convenient "apparent suicides" after learning that he was likely to face multiple murder charges and possibly the death penalty. No autopsy was performed on his body. Prior to the trumped up charges against Ivins, the unfortunate Steven Hatfill was also framed for the attacks, being described publicly as "a person of interest" by then attorney General John Ashcroft... thus trashing (Hatfill's) career and life by "kangaroo trial by corporate media". Hatfill was, of course, not guilty and was awarded damages.

The new developments in the case concern the findings of extraordinary high concentrations of both silicon and tin in the anthrax samples: whoever prepared this weaponized material was at the top of their game, as regards how to make the anthrax as potent and assimilable by human tissue as possible.

Naturally the FBI is not going to get "re-involved". They already "have their man", and the media shoved this lie down everyone;'s throat, in their inimitable way. Not only that, but "their man" cannot defend himself: he is most conveniently dead. The FBI's obvious mission in both the anthrax and 9/11 attacks, is (a) conceal the truth, and (b) to protect, rather than prosecute, the perpetrators. Otherwise they would follow leads, and in both cases, they are flagrantly stonewalling.

And then there is this:

These images, linking the anthrax attacks to "radical Islam" were dutifully shown, in endless-repetition mode, on the mainstream media in October 2001. Coming right after 9/11, an event already linked, by default, to Muslims before any investigation had happened, the anthrax attacks were also linked directly to Muslims.... and the already shocked-and-awed, preconditioned US public eagerly lapped up this "information", without question or hesitation.

However, when it was discovered that the anthrax had originated, not from some clandestine, fictitious "al Qaeda" mobile laboratory, but instead from the state of the art bioweapons research facility at Ft. Detrick, MD, what happened? The media, at the time in "all anthrax, all the time" mode, dropped the story at a stroke. I remember extraordinary turn of events most vividly because I was following the case closely and I became mystified why the coverage suddenly ceased, almost as if it never happened. I have to add that this was well before I had given serious consideration to the probability that the nature of both 9/11 and the anthrax letters were something entirely different to what we had been informed by the IS government and its knee-padded corporate media.....

If I may speculate for once, it is quite obvious that the two events were linked: a "one-two" terrorism punch, and maybe, perhaps, both events were planned and executed by the same people. After all, White House staff were ordered to take Ciprofloxacin, the powerful antibiotic specifically prescribed to treat anthrax infections. Why ever would that be?

The anthrax event should be the subject of the same type rigorous type of independent, full subpoena power investigation that we require, but have not yet been granted, for 9/11. And there is no way that we should put the SLIGHTEST trust in the FBI: they have appeared to be complicit in various degrees as regards not only the anthrax and 9/11 attacks, but also the Feb 26, 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center.

Whoever organized 9/11 and the anthrax attacks, IMHO, had it in for the world's Muslim community. it worked a treat... that community have become our new "National Piñata"... against whom it has become normalized, in the public awareness, to bomb into the stone age, no questions asked.

Jonathan Kay: Siding with Terrorists

2011-05-19T20:45:00.000-07:00

When it comes down to the "brass tacks", anyone who is actively against a proper, full, scientifically based, independent investigation of 9/11 (knowing just ONE proven fact that casts doubt on the official fairytale) is SIDING WITH THE 9/11THUGS, whoever they may be, by protecting them. The ONLY possible logical reasoning for (a) stonewalling against any form of investigation, as did the Bush White House for 441 days after 9/11, (b) setting up the resulting compromised inquiry (read farce) to fail and (c) actively preventing a real investigation, is to prevent the truth from emerging and justice from being served.

By some ironic twist, George W. Bush was right on when he said: "You're either with us, or you're with the terrorists". Jonathan Kay, is without a shadow of doubt, *with the terrorists*. So is the entire Obama Administration, the huge majority of the US Senate and Congress, and most of the US corporate mainstream media. In fact, anyone who knows that there are problems with the official story (and we all know there are some 100s of "problems"... many of them impossibilities, in this universe at least)... and actively pursues a course to prevent justice being served, is guilty of protecting the 9/11 terrorists.

Harsh words, and they are perhaps offensive to some people's comfort zones. However, the investigation and solving of the 9/11 attacks should not be mandated by niceties. Its time to start wielding a big stick and get this nasty episode behind us, by any means at our disposal. This nation can handle it, we are near 235 years old. If it means that a very large bunch of officials and others who are accessory after the fact to mass murder, doing long jail time, then so be it. I'll be the first to cheer.

No more appeasement.

Bin Laden: milking the bull

2011-05-13T20:33:00.000-07:00

This "puzzling audio message" is bogus, but very clever....putting out a story like this lends "credibility" to the manufactured fable that Osama bin Laden was recently assassinated by a squad of Navy Seals.

FACT: Osama bin Laden died in 2001, and his image was kept alive via old, or manufactured video recordings in order to maintain public support for the wars in the Mid East.

According to intelligence reports, Osama bin Laden had "outlived his usefulness", so it was decided to "kill him off", firstly to give Obama a boost when his popularity was in plummet-mode, secondly to put more fear up the American public that "al Qaeda" was going to carry out "revenge attacks", thirdly, as an excuse to introduce a new manufactured threat or even carry out a new false flag terror attack, which would prompt a fresh round of security measures and introduce public support for a new round of wars based on the current Islamophobia frenzy.

The old adage "follow the money" must never be forgotten, but but it appears that the US public have been in collective "docile idiot" mode since 9/11/2001.

They couldn't find bin Laden? Yeah, pull the other one.

2011-05-10T21:40:00.000-07:00

Here's three more absurd things about this entire trillion dollar mine of steaming bullshit that's being crammed down our throats:

(1) It's taken $1trillion, 10 years, the world's biggest manhunt *ever*, the combined resources of the CIA and the entire US military/intelligence/law enforcement apparatus, MI6, Mossad, Interpol, ISI, etc .,etc., etc., three long wars (two of them longer than World War II), the rounding up of thousands of people all over the world and the loss of civil rights for so many here, just to track down one man .... and now he's allegedly dead, we have zero hard proof/evidence to verify that the person killed was indeed OBL.

Up until the end of 2001, Osama bin Laden, while been on the FBI's most wanted list for bombings in Africa and elsewhere, has been interviewed 3 times by Jamal Khashoggi (Saudi Arabian), three times by Pakistani journalist Hamid Mir (most recently in November 2001), three times by UK journalist Robert Fisk, once by Pakistani journalist Rahimullah Yusufzai, once by ABC's John Miller, once by US journalist Peter Arnett, once by Adrian McLiman, several times by Tayseer Allouni (from Spain) October 2001, once by Abdel al-Bari Atwan (of Arabic paper Al-Quds Al-Arabi ), and even more.

Here we have the unbelievable situation in which numerous journalists were able to waltz into Bin Laden's hiding places with seemingly little difficulty (apart from a vetting procedure and a journey to remote villages), successfully conducted interviews with him, some on video, and then had them published in the press and on television. Perhaps the CIA should get into reporting the news, while journalists do the detective work?

The following two incidents have been neither confirmed, nor disproved either: He was reported to have been in Dubai in July 2001 for medical reasons and was visited by a CIA official. And on the night of September 10, 2001, it was reported that he spent the night at a Pakistani military intelligence facility in Rawalpindi that "reported to Washington DC on a daily basis".

And then they tell us that the entire might of the US law enforcement/intel community and military since the early 1990s has been unable to find him?

This is one big pile of BULLBISCUITS! Gimme a frackin' break.

*

(2) In the days right after 9/11, a number of bin Laden's relatives were hastily allowed to leave the US *before* they could be quizzed by the FBI etc... whisked out of the country on specially approved flights while all other aircraft, commercial and private, were grounded by the FAA.

But now, the US wants to question his wives, 10 years later? Why not then, but its OK now?

This does not compute.

*

(3) There was a $27 million reward (two sums, one $25 million, and an additional $2 million) on the head of Osama bin Laden, dead or alive, since shortly after 9/11. In 10 years, if he was indeed alive for that long... there must have been many people who knew of his whereabouts, status, etc etc.. but not a single person was interested in turning him in, in return for untold wealth and probably, lifelong protection.

That scenario seems decidedly far-fetched, and doesn't ring true either.

Obama and Osama. No so far apart as one would like to believe.

2011-05-03T22:29:00.000-07:00

Seeing the throng of ghouls, baying and ululating outside the White House, over the premeditated execution, with no trial, of another person, no matter who he is, makes me feel, ashamed, sick and disgusted as to how far down the road to medievalism this country has been dragged by its leaders, fed by the mainstream media's lies and biases. The current conduct of the US military, and the Obama White House, is exactly the kind of methodology against which countless thousands of US soldiers have died to resist in the past, the type of conduct that reared its very ugly head in Western Europe in the first half of the last century.

Osama bin Laden was accused of lots of heinous acts, but to deny *him* a trial sets the most dangerous precedent of them all: ANYONE, could be accused of ANYTHING, if the authorities decide so, and make that decision. Using trumped-up charges, bogus "justifications", denial of due process, denial of legal representation, imprisonment without charge, kept in legal limbo, solitary confinement, tortured, and even murdered in custody. All that has to be done, if a particular person or group is considered a thorn in the side of the powers-that-be, is abuse the law enforcement agencies into doing their dirty work, and that someone's life is down the tubes, whether innocent or guilty. The reality of their innocence or guilt never to be reasonably established. These are the long established, tried and tested methods of the most evil, vicious dictators and thugs that have disgraced the human race. Due process is what has traditionally separated us, the so-called shining city on the hill, from *them*.

Until very recently.

Open, fair trials, by a jury of peers, are for civilized nations. Summary executions, and secret, military tribunal, kangaroo trials are for those who rule by force, fear and terminal corruption.

The United States of America, by the actions of its leaders, is now siding with the kind of world that Osama bin Laden was accused of trying to bring about.

The boogeyman's alleged demise.

2011-05-02T11:38:00.000-07:00

If what they are telling us had a solitary ring of truth and reality to it, the entire operation would have been conducted completely differently.

OBL was a creation, a powerful phantom. His image, shown repetitively 24/7 in the Church of the Corporate Media, was used to herd the unwitting American people. In the wake of 9/11, the public were in a state of psychological "shock and awe", and voluntarily gave up decades of hard-won rights and liberties, to universally knee-jerk into supporting an endless "war on terror", a war as unwinnable as a "war on bad weather". Without a "shock and awe" event, a "global war on terror" was an absurd concept, utterly unsellable to the American people, a public with a collective sense of rationality.

Overcoming this huge obstacle required a transformation of public's collective rational state, in favor of a collective emotional psychological state. The same type of idea, albeit nowhere near as "in our face" was used to con the public into supporting "Operation Desert Storm" 10 years prior. By the cleverly using a carefully fabricated story (made by advertising consultants Hill and Knowlton) about "Saddam's troops hauling Kuwaiti babies out of incubators to die on the cold hard floor", the GHW Bush Administration, as if by magic, transformed overwhelming public hostility against war, to 90% support for it, by appealing to the public's collective emotional, rather than rational, state.

By the time the "war on terror" started, the public were in a slackjawed state of unquestioning obeisance, courtesy of witnessing the intentional mass murder of thousands of people in NYC, broadcast live, first thing in the morning. We were all shocked and awed... I recall it vividly , as I am sure all of us do. At a stroke, as if by magic, the world's most open society was transformed into a throng of fearful, obedient, straitjacketed masses. Free inquiry, skepticism and open conversation, once king, was suddenly as if by magic, declared off limits. The media's duty, which in a truly free an open society, is watchdog for we the people, suddenly became, as if by magic, a pathetic, parroting lapdog for the powers-that-be.

People who wanted a rational response to a criminal act, and a full investigation, were name-called as unpatriotic, and regarded as traitors. It was comforting; our nanny government became our surrogate mommy, promising to protect us against a universal enemy, which had become the oh-so-convenient replacement for the then recently defunct and much ballyhooed "communist threat". The decades-long preconditioning of the American public (by Hollywood, the media, government agencies et al) into mistrust and hatred for Muslim Middle easterners served to cement the publics' baying for death and destruction, no questions asked.

It was so easy to jump on the revenge bandwagon. All it required was a bachelor's degree in Ostrichology, a masters degree in "Follow my Leader", a PhD in Intellectual Cowardice, and the gall to accuse doubters of wearing tinfoils hats, when the real conspiracy loons were the the weasels and shills for authoritarianism and corruption, who were too cowardly to step up to the plate when their country so badly needed them.

Osama is dead, take #312

2011-05-01T23:38:00.000-07:00

So Osama bin Laden is dead, (again).

Very convenient for neocon stooge Obama, great for his ratings.

The last thing the US wanted was to have to bring this bozo to court, especially since he was not wanted by the FBI for 9/11, the US Dept. of Justice had not indicted him for 9/11, CIA admitted his finances were not connected to the attacks, and bin Laden himself claimed he had nothing to do with 9/11 at first (then he "changed his mind").

All the "evidence" against him for that attack was at best hearsay, and the rest of it was manufactured lies and demonstrable fabrications. He was clearly a patsy who had outlasted his usefulness. He has most likely been dead for a long period of time, his preserved body kept to be presented at a time when politically expedient. In Pakistan, there were reports as early as 2002 that OBL was deceased.

This latest report is only corroborated by the US military and the powers that be... otherwise, *nothing*. No proof. No chain of custody. The track record for honesty and accuracy of information from the Pentagoons is the joke of the century. A band of fucking liars, the lot of them.

Obama is not only a tool, but also an accessory after the fact to mass murder. Same goes for Bush, Cheney and many of the other leading scumbags and psychopaths of the prior administration. When their time is up (which for millions around the Middle East who have lost families, friends and relatives on account of the ongoing murderous campaign and slaughter known as the "war on terrorism"), it will not be a second too soon. Then, may they all burn in the fires of hell alongside their buddy-boy Osama.

The worst part about 9/11 is that the perpetrators are still on the loose, in the US, protected by heavy security, and will likely strike again, AT A TIME OF THEIR CHOOSING. May we hope that a brave patriot, with the evidence that will stand up in a real court, blow the whistle on the killers before they murder another few thousand of us, to further their vicious, criminal, psychopathic agenda.

Evil, conniving, manipulating bastards, the lot of them... At best, they are incapable of contributing an iota of civilized worth to the human cause. At worst, they are on a par with the lowest that the human race has dredged up... the grand scale equivalent of a Frankensteinian hybrid of Charles Manson, Jeffrey Dahmer and Pol Pot.

I kid you not.

They're at it, again.

2011-04-09T21:41:00.000-07:00

This is more bogus fear-mongering by the authorities, whether the red team, or the blue team are in the seats of power.

Real, or "bona fide" (if that term is appropriate) terrorists tend to steer a long way clear of high security locations, for obvious reasons... to aim at high security targets would (obviously) render their mission a certain chance of FAILURE. (like, duh!).

Similarly (according to any intelligence agency worth its salt, in any nation one may care to mention), real terrorists never use real time electronic communications, such as cellphones, land phones, email, and social media sites/chat rooms on the internet for the same obvious reason: they know that these networks are to insecure to maintain secrecy re. their nefarious plans. Real terrorist gangs use snail-mail, couriers, and plan their attacks in private, remote usually rural areas. (kinda obvious, one would imagine).

There are millions of unsecured public places and facilities in this nation which would be incredibly easy to target…just think about it. Every town and city has hundreds of "soft" targets where leaving a bomb with a timing device, and getting away without being apprehended, would be child's play. So, the question is… why is it that terrorism is such a very, very rare event in the US? Is it because the national security state that was set up post 9/11 is so efficient at preventing it? Not a chance in hell…. we hear reports in the media every month which highlight severe security deficiencies in certain places, such as ports of entry.

The reason this story keeps cropping up is the need by the authorities to keep playing the terrorism card. A frightened public is a malleable public, and if there is no real terrorism happening (by the folks who are branded 24/7 as all terrorists or potential terrorists… ie Arabs and Muslims).. then the powers-that-be either have to (1) concoct stories about "terrorist attacks being successfully foiled or averted", (2) highlight the issue with stories such as this CNN article, or (3) the most sinister part, to actually plan terrorist attacks against one own nation to further the interests if those who profit from the outcome. (Check Operation Northwoods, the Red Brigade attacks, the Moscow apartment bombings, and numerous others). False flag events such as these are a primary tool of rogue elements in government and military, because they work *every time*…. and the US is no stranger to these tactics.

The real terrorists are more often generated by the authorities themselves, and the corporate media in obedient tow. Owned largely by the "military industrial complex" , the media have a vested interest in keeping the public terrified and on edge. After all, that is part of the FBI's definition of terrorism… "…imposing fear and terror amongst the public, for political gain.

CIA in LIBYA, Afghanistan.

2011-03-31T11:45:00.000-07:00

Al Qaeda is a creation of CIA, from the 1980s in Afghanistan. "AL QAEDA" (Arabic) literally means "The Base" or even "the toilet").

The "Base" refers to the CIA's DATABASE of Mujahadeen warlords and fighters for whom the CIA covertly supplied $billions in funds, weapons, ammunition, supplies and state of the art equipment in order to dislodge the USSR's occupation. President Reagan even equated these extremist Islamic "freedom fighters" as the Mid East's "equivalent to our Founding Fathers".

Needless to say, in the interest of tracking these funds and equipment, the CIA created an extensive computer DATABASE of all this material, where it went, the contents of each weapons shipment, who received it, the identities of the main contacts in the area. Everything about this program over the a decade or so was carefully recorded in this CIA DATABASE.

Osama bin Laden was one of those involved, and he has very close agency connections. He was even visited in a Dubai hospital by 3 CIA field agents including the Dubai station chief Larry Mitchell in June 2001, while he was wanted by the FBI in connection with the US Embassy bombings in Africa in the 1990s, and the attack on the USS Cole in Yemen. "AL QAEDA" is not "the enemy"... It has been highly successfully framed as such, by the agency with the media predictably in tow. Unfortunately for the US, the gullible public swallowed this garbage and digested it. AL QAEDA is just a small part of our real enemy.... a major element of which happens to reside in Langley, VA, and funded by our tax dollars, to the tune of 10s of $Billions annually.

Radical Islam is totally a creation of the CIA. Thats why we're hearing about "AL QAEDA" in Libya alongside CIA personnel... they are one and the same.

Their modus operandum? Make a problem, then address it militarily... and it pays certain well connected people very handsomely.

Terrorists R US, part 3,953

2011-03-27T12:34:00.001-07:00

US (and NATO) meddlings in the Middle East are getting more bizarre and twisted as the years go by.

It turns out (regardless of what al Qaida actually is, was, or has become), that the Libyan rebel leader, Abdel Hakim al Hasidi is affiliated with both al Qaida and the Taliban.

Abdel Hakim al Hasidi is reportedly a member of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group. It is the most powerful radical faction waging jihad in Libya and was officially designated as an affiliate of both al Qaida and the Taliban by the UN 1267 Committee (listed towards the bottom of the page).

Looks like President Obama not only authorized an illegal and unconstitutional military action in Libya (bypassing Congress), but also this effort is in support of people who are connected to the same group(s) who were allegedly responsible for the 9/11 attacks, and the designated target in the 10 year so-called "war on terrorism" (sic).

First, we were sold the absurd and irreconcilable notion that the war in Libya is to "protect the people of Libya against the Gadhafi regime". Now it seems that the $200-$500 million per day operation in Libya, funded by we the taxpayer is apparently in aid of "jihadists". Or is every monstrous duplicity deemed irrelevant, in the minds of the psychopaths who make the decisions, when compared to the importance of Libya's large reserves of

"light, sweet, crude"?

A thought on Ayn Rand...

2011-02-20T12:22:00.001-08:00

Although Rand's philosophy was vehemently opposed to Social Security and other forms of welfare, she received Social Security and other health benefits using her husband's name. The circular "justification" she used for this inconsistency (read hypocrisy) was that it was "morally OK" to accept such payments, knowing that the government uses coercive power to collect taxes to fund such payments.

I wonder what Rand would think of today's mega-welfare queens of the military-industrial-prison-security complex? What would she think as they strutted along the platform of the corporate gravy-train station awaiting their next astronomically sized multibillion $$$handouts and no bid contracts, all funded by we the long suffering taxpayer?

What would Ms. Rand think of the $$$multi trillion bank "bail-out" (mega scam) of the last 2.5 years, together with the lack of investigation, and the outrageous coercion of Congress to vote for the TARP and other government welfare schemes to get the bankster cartel off the hook?

What would she think of the spectacle of the bastions of "Free Market" Capitalism being rescued by socialism in its standard form, i.e. government funded welfare.. except this time on the grandest scale ever?

Egypt... Some less hopeful commentary....

2011-02-11T19:12:00.000-08:00

Acting President Suleiman is as much a potential horror story for the Egyptian people as former puppet-thug-president Mubarak. Now they are under a military government. Is this temporary? Who claimed such, and under what authority? Who knows what may happen now.... Why is everyone assuming that "democracy and freedom have arrived in Egypt", just because the guy who used to wave his arms around and bark the orders has just stepped down?

The Egyptian military might easily decide to (ab)use their new found power, now that the most visible cause of the peoples' ire has (apparently) slunk away into the shadows. There is a current perceived power vacuum, the people are now jubilant, under a false sense of security, with the collective awareness of "OK, we won, everything's now going to be just fine. (On a parallel, remember the election of November 2008???).

One can guarantee that opportunistic conversations and plans are circulating like wildfire around the Egyptian top brass... there are always people who cannot resist a power grab, regardless of culture, nation, political leanings, etc. The Egyptian public have been yearning for free elections, the economy settling down, getting back to work and resuming living their lives again", and in their collective "unguarded moment", it could be a possible case of "out of the frying pan, and into the fire", for the Egyptian people. The military have had a passive presence throughout the protests, but why should such a stance continue, now that the people are exhausted with the cycle of anger, protest, and celebration? That is where the guard comes down, and the power vacuum gets filled.. and before they know whats hit them, its back to "square one", or worse.

I am not suggesting that continuation of totalitarianism is the most likely outcome; however... even though this appeared on the surface to be an exhibition of "people power", in which an unpopular regime was toppled by protest powered by social media internet sites, the fact that this all happened so damned quickly and easily after 3 decades of ironfisted hell does not sit quite right. Things rarely change as rapidly as that without a lot more resistance, and with a huge question mark over the continued unchanged status of the vitally strategic Suez Canal...... Think about it.

Additionally, why is Obama so in favor of this change towards what looks, on the surface, like liberty for Egypt? Why so little ranting from the ranks of the real US power structure, which would be horrified had this been a genuine, 100%, bona fide people-fueled revolution? One of the few hints re. the leanings of such, came from former VP Cheney when he said that "Mubarak is a great leader, a friend and ally of the US". I guess it takes a thug to know one, and we have already found out that Obama is not "the man of hope and change" that he claimed in his bogus election promises 2008.... far from it.

The corporate US "hidden hand of government" behind the "representative" D.C. facade has been gagging for the possible "continuity of dictatorship" outcome, as has the US intelligence/security community, the Israeli hardline right wing, and their representation US DC neoconservative cartel, now operating behind the scenes, but just as effectively, under Obama. The euphoria for Egypt might be shortlived, and the future for the Egyptian people may just as easily be "roasting in hell", rather than "a bright new future".

Rant over.... and I hope I am 100% wrong here.

Dystopia and duplicity gets personal

2011-02-07T11:49:00.000-08:00

At or around 4-30pm on the afternoon of Saturday February 5, 2011, my wife and I arrived at the Reagan Center in Santa Barbara to attend a rally, one aim of which was to voice discontent at the presence of former VP Cheney, and former 2008 Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin who were in the building to make a speeches to the Young Americans group who hosted the gathering.

Having been there for about 10 or 15 minutes, while my wife was filming and getting interviews (from both sides of the political fence), I took a ready-made placard (a simple 2' x 3' piece of white card-stock painted with a slogan, with no wooden carrying stick) and walked around the side of the building, via the railroad station access lane, to see if any other protesters were in evidence. Many cars belonging to the event attendees were being valet-parked by men wearing uniforms which included a pinkish/purplish jacket. As I walked back towards the main rally area, watched closely by a small group of uniformed police officers standing in the Reagan Center courtyard area, suddenly a Lexus 4 door saloon driven by one of the uniformed valet drivers, suddenly revved the engine, and accelerated straight at me, at close range. Luckily, my reactions were fast enough to be able to jump onto the curb (there is no sidewalk), spinning a full 180º and almost overbalancing into a low hedge,very narrowly avoiding being hit very hard and full on. The car zipped past, literally an inch from the curb (and me), the driver then hit the brakes with a sharp squeal, and the car did a rapid right-hand turn into the parking lot and disappeared from view.

It was clearly obvious that this valet driver had seen me: I was in his headlamps, and I was carrying a large white placard, and and he had the entire width of the road to use (at least two car widths across), yet he turned slightly right and accelerated straight at me. Feeling shocked, with my knees feeling weak and my heart racing furiously, (similar to the feeling of the adrenalin rush one gets having narrowly avoided a road accident), I turned around and called over to two of the police officers (the other one was by then walking away across the courtyard towards the Reagan Center building): "That maniac driver just tried to run me down", and …"You must have seen that". Both officers walked the few steps over to the other side of the low hedge and I repeated myself, twice more. They both looked at me, impassively, without expression; one shook his head as if to say "no". Obviously, all three had seen what had just happened, they were only a few yards away and had been watching me closely (I was carrying a protest sign, for heavens sake). I persisted: "why did that driver just have a go at me, and can't you do anything? He might have run me over and killed me". One of the officers then advised, "perhaps you could go to the central station and file a report". I then said,"well the only witnesses were you law enforcement, and maybe the group of other valet drivers who were standing near an entrance to the parking lot area where the broadcast media were camped out, but they were quite a bit further away, and, (I assumed) unlikely to be witnesses willing to testify against one of their colleagues. I again persisted…"Would you be witnesses to this?" I got no answer, in fact, not even a reply. I tried again and again but I could see this was going nowhere, fast. One of the uniformed officers then said, "I would prefer it if you left this area and return to the "designated protest zone". Although still feeling shaky, by now I was annoyed, and I stated my constitutional rights. The officer agreed with me and said "yes, you quite are at liberty to stay here but I would prefer if if you returned to the rally" … (which I was in the process of doing when the Lexus tried to ram me).

Even though I was breaking no law,, I complied with the officer's request, as I always do under these circumstances. As I walked back, I addressed another officer standing where the path from State Street meets the roadway to the railroad station parking lot, and I described what had just happened. He said virtually the same thing: "You could file a complaint at the police station". I told him there were at least two, perhaps three witnesses, all law enforcement officers, but none were willing to be witnesses. "Nothing I can do about that, sorry". I reported this to at least 6 officers, including the two who saw the incident from close range, but I got exactly the same responses, or non-responses.

By now, the shock from narrowly avoiding a bad accident had been replaced by irritation. Had I (a) not been looking directly in front of me, or (b) had my reactions not been lightning fast, it could have resulted in a nasty injury. To be honest, I got pretty angry afterwards when I described what happened to my wife and others attending the protest rally. Now, as I write this, feeling calm and collected, about two hours afterwards), it is difficult not to let my personal political biases color the way I evaluate what happened. However, one thing remains abundantly clear: had the tables been turned, and it had been a vehicle driven by a protester used against one of those attending the Young Americans event, would the police have acted with the same supreme and total disinterest, even when a crime, namely an obvious assault using a vehicle as a weapon had been committed right under their noses? Common sense, combined with a modicum of awareness re. at how the system "works", would tell anyone with an IQ somewhere above room temperature, that had the driver been a protester, the police response would have been 180º in opposition: the likely outcome would have been the prompt arrest of the offender, charged with using a vehicle as a deadly weapon, and possibly more; bail would have been set at a very high figure, say $6 figures, and with the only witnesses been the police, the trial would returned a guilty verdict, and a lengthy jail sentence imposed by the judge. The case would have garnered major coverage in both local and national media, and lots of commentary.This, of course, (in my opinion) would have been the correct outcome; violent crimes should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

Practice is often diametrically opposed to theory. In theory, the police are employed to protect us all. In theory, we are all considered equal under the law. Unfortunately, as I found out this evening, almost to the extent of a (possibly) lengthy hospital stay, the civil rights of certain people are clearly considered by our system and society to count for a lot more than the rights of others. Although there was never any security threat from the small group of peaceful (albeit vocal) protesters standing at quite a distance from the building, singing John Lennon tunes and beating drums, local law enforcement (as well as Secret Service and FBI) were doing a very thorough job in maintaining a tight ring of security for those attending the event at the Reagan Center. I have no gripe with that, although I do have to ask what did those folk do that required such heavy security? However, the standard of security provided by the police for those voicing opposition to those attending the Reagan event, was clearly demonstrated as regards the attempted assault on me: when an employee of a contractor serving the event openly committed an attempted hit and run assault against a law abiding member of the community (myself), watched at close range by police, they arbitrarily decided that MY civil rights counted for absolutely nothing at all.

I am here going to allow myself to speculate a little: had I been actually struck by that car, who would have gotten into trouble? Would the driver have been arrested and charged, or would the police have charged me with an offense, perhaps "obstruction" or similar, using trumped up charges, in which no witnesses were present except the police? This kind of stuff happens routinely, no matter what country we're describing. Perhaps the driver was instructed to "scare away" an unwelcome protester? Recently, Mubarak's thugs in Cairo charged into crowds with vehicles and on horseback, causing many casualties. Perhaps I was lucky to have gotten smartly out of the way? This is not a "sour grapes" type of speculation: I have watched the nature of protest for many years, on both sides of the Atlantic: craven duplicity is rampant in our society, and the amount of protection afforded to members of society is directly proportional to their material standing they have, and the amount of influence they wield. No deliberate or systematic "conspiracy" is required to accomplish such: flaws in human nature, and the temptation to wield power over others, allows such to happen with great predictability and efficiency.

Lastly, in retrospect, I do not regard this incident as an attack against me, personally… although shortly after it happened, I got the opposite impression… which, in my own defense, is quite understandable, under the circumstances… I narrowly avoided a possibly severe injury. However: the driver did not know me. I did not know him. Why did he deliberately gun the car at me, without provocation, without motivation? Or was there a motivation, lets say, to scare demonstrators away using violent means, on the assurance that the police wouldn't take any action against them? Who knows? This sounds not like the America I have always believed in, but things have changed rapidly for the worse, accelerating rapidly downhill since 2001. Decades worth of hard won rights were taken away, at a stroke by the previous administration, and the current Obama administration has done nothing to restore them. In fact, our civil rights have had further setbacks since Obama's election in 2008, with the ever expanding cancer of the "national security state". This insignificant attack on one lone person was a demonstration, in microcosm, of the way society is shifting towards dystopia, fueled by the corporate media's promotion of phantom threats, and the perceived psychological perception amongst the public, to be protected.

Cheney: evil by any definition.

2011-02-06T10:32:00.000-08:00

So, Dick Cheney is spouting his totalitarian trap yet again; just when we thought the King of Evil had thankfully retired from the political stage, more slime comes oozing from his direction, on Ronald Reagan's 100th birthday. Cheney claims now that "Mubarak is a friend and ally to the United States". I guess it takes a thug to know a thug. By the way, Reagan said the same thing of Saddam Hussein of Iraq, while the latter was authorizing the murder of tens of thousands thousands of his own people, and starting preemptive war against Iran. I honestly don't think that Reagan was *quite* so vicious and coldblooded as Cheney... that would be quite a leap... but his administration was on the record as one of the most corrupt on record as regards criminal indictments against members of his administration.

So Cheney's spouting again.

Cheney: the chicken-hawk coward who deferred military service on several separate occasions because he had "other priorities".

Cheney: the man who co-signed the notorious PNAC document on September 10, 2000 (Rebuilding America's Defenses), that called for (amongst other extreme measures) all-out war in the middle east, tripling the "defense" budget, putting weapons in space, and developing genetically engineered biological agents specifically targeting mid eastern (Arab) "ethnic genotypes".

Cheney: the man responsible for no less than 20 simultaneous military drills and exercises on the morning of 9/11 that effective kept our air force interception jets away from the area which was under attack.

Cheney: the man who lied to the 9/11 Commission regarding his whereabouts on the morning of 9/11, as witnessed by former Transportation Sec. Norman Mineta and many others.

Cheney: the man who ordered the plane that hit the Pentagon not to be intercepted, when there was ample warning in advance.

Cheney: the man who changed the rules regarding the protocol for plane interceptions in July 2001, which required that the default scramble procedure be authorized by the then Defense Sec. Rumsfeld. (The original working protocol was restored September 12, 2001).

Cheney: The man who held Dubya's hand while testifying to the 9/11 Commission.

Cheney: the man who lied, (amongst many others in the Bush Administration), about linking Iraq and the 9/11 attacks.

Cheney: the man who lied (amongst many in the Bush Administration) about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

Cheney: the man who has authorized and supporting the detention and torture of people without charge.

One would have thought that Cheney would have *loved* those 19 rookie kids (of whom there are no remains) who managed to disable the entire US military/security/intelligence apparatus that morning… they earned him, alongside Cheney's buddyboys in the war and oil sectors, vast fortunes from the programs and events that resulted from the 9/11 attacks.

But hey, those who have digested only the corporate "weasel" media may knee-jerk about "conspiracy theories". (Yawn). Such infantile responses can only come from the mouths of those who cannot handle having their comfort zones ruffled, or those who acknowledge that the laws of physics can be violated when it comes to blaming the "evil Muslims". Such, since the end of WWII, has been a national sport, and since the fall of organized communism, has become a national obsession.

How about we send that evil traitor to Guantanamo Bay… and yes, it would be fascinating to see if he likes being water boarded.....

Publish Post

Who hates Arabs? Most of the US... it makes us feel good.

2011-02-01T19:42:00.000-08:00

The deal with America, is that the US public has been psychologically conditioned to hate and/or distrust Muslims and Arabs; this effort has lasted for many decades, since the creation of Israel - an event in which hundreds of thousands of Palestinian people were summarily kicked off their land, out of their homes and villages, into concentration camps, where many remain, in appalling conditions and denied even basic human rights.

Supposedly "liberal" Hollywood (!) has been actually one of the worst offenders, in that virtually all movies (almost 1,000) made which feature Arabs and Muslims, have portrayed them as evil, or violent, or criminal. The corporate "weasel" appeaser news media has done exactly the same, as has television, radio, print media, government agencies and private enterprise. Americans have firmly established "comfort zone" in which we are content, unquestioning and obedient when it comes to buying the notion of the "bad arab" when it comes to the formulation of US foreign policy.

Finally, the large proportion of Middle East News which is filtered to the US public is translated, edited and shaped by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), an outfit headed by people who are Islamophobic; Meyrav Wurmser and Yigal Carmon. MEMRI's articles are, by default, biased, inaccurate, and the facts often cherry-picked to make articles digestible to an easily appeased US audience.

Anyone reading this, who has been conditioned by years of media bias against Arabs and Muslims will, by default, resort to the pavlovian and infantile response of "conspiracy theory accusations". But there is the depth to which the discussion has sunk in the US…. education cuts really have had a profound effect, not only as regards this issue, but most areas of contemporary politics.

Go Egypt! Freedom is yours, if you can ignore the weasel commentary from Hillary et al!

2011-01-28T15:40:00.000-08:00

The tear gas being used against protesters in Egypt (Tunisia, Yemen, Palestine, etc) is produced by CSI (Combined Services Inc), located in Jamestown, Pennsylvania (USA)... amongst others of course. CSI is, in essence, an Israeli firm and prominently flies the Israeli flag outside its US headquarters. Their tear gas typically contains the highly toxic component of CS gas, which killed at least one Palestinian woman (Jawaher abu Rahmah) three weeks ago. The CS gas choking Egyptian protesters is a present from the Israelis... probably paid for, in a round-about fashion, by we the US taxpayers... nice huh.

But, its business as usual. For decades, especially since the end of WWII and the inexorable metastasis of the military/security/industrial cancer within the US economy, the US (corporate controlled government) has gone to an inordinate effort to THWART or EXCLUDE freedom for any nations headed by non-democratic insitutions: malleable dictatorships and autocracies make life easier and more profitable for US (and global) big business, in many sectors. The fact that the US has traditionally supported thugs, despots, dictators, juntas and autocrats, while toppling democratically elected governments in Mid East, South and Central American, and Third World nations is quite easy to understand, especially if one's retirement portfolio is weighted in companies that profit from war, chaos and unrest.

Mubarak is just another puppet thug. Follow the money, it's the same everywhere

Pastor Jones, the Koran Burning Preacher.

2011-01-24T22:00:00.000-08:00

Mr. Hatred himself, "Pastor" Jones, the Koran burning preacher, has been banned from entering the UK. Well, well.

Unfortunately for us all, the opinions of Jones represents a fairly typical view of Muslims throughout much of mainstream United States.

The degree of enmity or even hatred that a nation's population (in general) has for one particular group is partially reflected in that nation's ability/willingness to elect politicians belonging to that group... where racial/religious biases are sublimated in favor of recognition of a person's merit.

Despite the enduring racism against the black community in large parts of the country, this hasn't prevented the election of up to 730 African Americans to various positions in US politics, including President.

Despite enduring racism (within some segments of the US population) against the Jewish community, this hasn't prevented the election of 320 Jewish American politicians.

Despite the enduring racism against Native Americans, who number around 2.5 to 3 million (including native Hawaiians and Alaskans), 50 have been elected to various positions in US politics.

There are only nine US Muslims in politics at all levels combined, despite the Muslim population of the US numbering anything between 2.75 million and 6 million (depending on the survey), which represents a similar ratio to the total population as the US Jewish community.

The entire Republican Party, at all levels, boasts just one solitary Muslim politician, Saggy Tahir, a part time official in the New Hampshire Assembly. In 2000, he was the first ever Muslim American elected to any political position in the US.

Looks like the "Pastor Jones Opinion" was, is and will be prevalent in the US mainstream for the foreseeable future... especially when opinions and conditioning are so dependent on the stances taken by what is churned out by the "liberal" (!) US corporate media and "liberal" (!) Hollywood.

Hatred of, or disrespect for Muslims and Arabs, now an integral part of the US scene, has been hard-sold to the US public for many decades. Hollywood is but just one example of such, exhaustively documented in Jack Shaheen's 800 page encyclopedic "Reel Bad Arabs: How Hollywood Vilifies a People"

The regular corporate media has been even harsher; the after decades of absolute one-sided reporting on the Israeli Palestine situation (amongst others), the huge majority of the US public now think that "Palestinian" and "terrorist" are virtually synonymous. Since 9/11, a similar broad mindset has developed nationwide regarding the word "Muslim" and "terrorist".

The US public has been taught for decades to beware the boogeyman (to "justify" the cancerous "defense" budget, and since the "Commies" don't quite cut it anymore re. "boogeyman" status, the world's Muslim community has been assigned to take up the slack... it fits the general US comfort zone perfectly.

Tunisia, another light comes on in the darkness.

2011-01-16T18:11:00.000-08:00

The former leader of Tunisia, Ben Ali, yet another brutal, repressive scumball of a leader supported by the U.S., has been kicked out. Good riddance. The U.S. has an appalling record of coddling, financing and supporting the world's most evil men, overthrowing democracies, while training and installing thugs and would-be dictators in institutions of international terror, such as the School of the Americas (aka WHISC) in Fort Benning, GA. Thugs and bullies are easily malleable by the superpower; they don't have the problem of having to deal with their PEOPLE, who vote and occasionally get in the way of corporate feudalism, or velvet gloved fascism, the system that the US and allies are aiming to install globally, by not only the bullet and the bomb, but also by stealth.

The big hope, the light in the darkness, has been lit in South America over the last 15 years. Argentina, Paraguay, Ecuador, Chile, Brazil, Peru, Bolivia, Venezuela and Uruguay have all suffered terribly under the heavy manners of hardline, rightwing, vicious dictatorial régimes funded and supported by the United States. After the slaughter, imprisonment and disappearance of hundreds of thousands, severe poverty, mass unemployment, IMF financial terrorism and the accompanying abject failure of the neoliberal Friedmanesque economic model for all except a terminally corrupt and criminal élite, the people of South America have had enough. One by one, the long suffering nations in Latin America have rejected US dominated totalitarianism, and the ranks of dictators have fallen like so many dominoes. The thug-o-cracy program long supported by the likes of war criminals like Kissinger, Nixon, Bush et al is a nightmare that will DIE, consigned to the "unmarked graves of discarded lies", such as Stalinism and Naziism.

One more down, but lots more to fall. Bring it on!

Won't someone tell me what the birds say?

2011-01-05T21:12:00.000-08:00

Watch VIDEO HERE

The recent events in Arkansas, in which 5000 blackbirds died in as of yet satisfactorily explained circumstances highlight the trend towards America precipitous decline towards fascism.

On New Year's Eve in Beebe, Arkansas, 5000 blackbirds were killed in flight. After the first "explanation" of hail and lightning was quickly debunked, so-called "experts" blamed a "professional quality fireworks display", which nobody in the area apparently witnessed.

The birds died between 10pm and 11-30pm; fireworks on New Years, of course, are traditionally ignited on the stoke of midnight.

Albeit speculative, a possible but likely explanation is a psychological experiment to monitor the rationality of the public when presented with garbage, but inoffensive, comfortable pabulum. Cass Sunstein, a senior Obama Administration official, is in charge of the program to infantilize the US public in order to lessen the challenge and outrage that an informed populace would register. It is likely that such a scheme might have been conceived under the aegis of Sunstein et al, with the cooperation of the Department of Defense and corporations involved with weapons manufacture and "security" (read "creeping totalitarianism") services.

This piece focuses on the mandate to question everything that the corporate media and the powers-that-be feed to the people in the accelerating agenda to hijack we-the-the people's involvement in the process of governance.

Terrorism and America's dystopian journey.

2010-12-28T15:31:00.000-08:00

First lets define terrorism: The FBI's definition will suffice here: "The unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a Government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives".

There are three main types of terrorist, or causes of terrorism:

(1) Those who are fanatically committed to a cause, and brainwashed to the extent that everything else becomes insignificant.

(2) People for whom life has become so hellish that they have nothing left to lose; the more unbalanced, dysfunctional and angry in that demographic resort to violence against any symbol of their oppressors, including civilians.

(3) "False flag" terrorism, in which rogue or paramilitary elements within a government, whether democracy or dictatorship, launch attacks within their own nation, and blame it on a 3rd party assigned as an enemy. This has often been used to bring a population around to supporting an otherwise politically unsellable or unpopular agenda.

As a result of unbalanced and cowardly reporting by the corporate media, most Americans are highly aware of the first two types, yet blissfully, and conveniently ignorant of the third. When the false flag method gets a (rare) mention, it offends the comfort zones of the majority to the extent that the response is usually an infantile, Pavlovian rant about "lack of patriotism", or endless repetition of that weary, worn out weasel-phrase, "conspiracy theorists". Such a response might be "understandable", given the premise that in a representative democracy "members of government are an extension of ourselves, and "we" would never do such terrible things… but it does not map accurately onto the harsher reality.

Terrorism has been a method of persuasion by force since human civilization got going, but it is not really until the last 100 years, in the age of mass communication, that it has been used so extensively as a political tool, to demonize entire populations, and manipulate public opinion. Here in the West, the public has been programmed and manipulated by decades of biased reporting, entertainment sources and opinion, that, for the current example, "all Muslims and all Arabs are terrorists or potential terrorists". "Reel Bad Arabs", the 800 page encyclopedic analysis on Hollywood's attitude towards Arabic middle eastern people is a stunning indictment on the racist, hateful attitude within the Hollywood power-broker set in systematically demonizing Arabs and Islam in popular entertainment. This is not the first time that the military-industrial sector has teamed up with Hollywood to create a boogeyman in America's collective psyche; the 1950s were jam-packed with allegorical (but cheesy) sci-fi themes based on the notion that the "Reds" were out to get us, even when they were unable to feed their own populations, and had no scheme or intent to strike first.

The US economy has been based upon war since the 1950s; we spend more than 50% of our national budget on military related programs. Without war, or a cold war, things go south very quickly for business, ranging from small enterprise to mega-multinational corporations. From the end of WWII until 1990, the presence of the "evil communists" were enough to keep things trucking along just nicely to maintain this status quo… but after the collapse of the Soviet Bloc, the US was left without a permanent enemy, and there was no basis for waging perpetual war, or cold war. Small conflicts in Central America, Africa and the Balkans didn't cut the cake, and the Clinton Administration started cutting military expenditure to reflect the lesser "threat" or, rather, perceived threat. This culling enraged the neoconservative elite in Washington DC, who were in the political backwaters throughout the Clinton years, and as a direct result, they wrote up an agenda which, if elected, would reverse the trend.

Their extremist manifesto, entitled "Rebuilding America's Defenses" was quietly published online, September 10, 2000, just two months before the disputed presidential election of November that year. Its signatories included many people who would later assume high-ranking positions within the Bush cabinet, right up to Vice President. The agenda called for a massive increase in US military spending and programs of perpetual war; the ability to wage simultaneous wars in multiple theaters of operation, the weaponization of space, even the development of "biological weapons aimed at specific ethnic genotypes", which they described as a "politically useful tool", and more. The authors even admitted that such an extraordinary, politically unsellable agenda would require a "catastrophic, catalytic event, like a new Pearl Harbor"…. in other words, a massive terrorist attack upon America or American interests.

The wildest dreams of not only the "neocons", but also the security/military/intelligence community, and all those who profiteer from warmongering came true on 9/11/2001, when a major act of terrorism got the US public (and much of the world) solidly behind an agenda which would otherwise have been laughed out of Congress as pure jingoism and Orwellian dystopic paranoia. Since that day, America's government and corporate media has obsessed over selling terror and fear to a jittery and frightened population, and the efforts are bearing the fruits of totalitarianism at an ever increasing pace.

Many civil rights, hard-won over decades of effort, have been eliminated at a stroke. The Bill of Rights has been decimated in the name of "security". Habeas Corpus, a 1000 year old principle of civilized justice, is now of a "pre-9/11 world". Posse Comitatus is done. Imprisoning people indefinitely without charge is now "accepted practice" as is kidnapping, torture and abuse at the hands of our intelligence agencies and military, the launching of two major wars lasting twice as long as the US involvement in WWII, based 100% on lies, keep on costing the taxpayer $200 billion annually,and is supported without question in Congress. Spying on Americans using government agencies is now the norm. People who are skeptical of the post 9/11 agenda, community activists, environmentalists, anti-war groups and anyone who dares not to conform are all lumped together and targeted, put on "no fly lists", do-not-employ lists or even arrested on trumped-up charges. Even a commercial pilots who bravely spoke up recently was fired and branded as "anti-American". This is the tip of an ugly iceberg, all promoted by an appeasing, cowardly lap-dog media that refuses to ask questions.

The course taken by America in the 2000s under Bush, and the 2010s under Obama bears a striking parallel to that taken by Germany in the 1930s, prior to the outbreak of World War II. It was a False Flag terrorist attack, the destruction of the Reichstag Parliament Building, that allowed Hitler to assume dictatorial powers without question from a somnambulant, obedient, and "shocked and awed" population..leading to a a 6 year attempt to build an empire using military force. America's Reichstag, of course, was 9/11, an event which remains un-investigated and unsolved, and the most likely perpetrators remain unpunished and free to attack again, at a time of their choosing. Meanwhile the minority who fail to digest and recycle the "Maximum Security Koolaid (ie "we the people who dare to think (!) are regularly branded as "unpatriotic", or even "siding with the enemy" or "terrorist sympathizers", or "purveyors of wild conspiracy theory". President Obama has even dedicated a new officially sanctioned government effort, headed by Cass Sunstein, to deal with those who refuse to kowtow to the propaganda machine.

And what is the mechanism that has allowed us to sink to the ignominious depths that the Founding Fathers went to great efforts to try and prevent? FEAR, our willingness to trade our freedoms for protection, and our unwillingness to face difficult and unpalatable facts. Those who have crafted the course of the last 10 years are well versed in mass-psychology and how to control and manipulate a population without having to resort to the proverbial "tanks in the streets". All it needs, is subtle coercion and the threat to our comfort zones, to keep us in line, and shopping.

And who are the easiest, most sellable patsies upon whom to unload the decades of programming, media "education", and subtlety directed hatred? Muslims and Arabs. They're all terrorists, because that's what we have been told…. and don't you dare rock the boat, or else. And even in a relatively open-minded Southern California coastal town (compared to the intellectual wasteland of, for example, rural Missouri), there are plenty of people who unconditionally hate Muslims and Arabs…I have met far too many of them.

Mission Accomplished. Happy New Year. And for those who support the Maximum Security agenda, may the poop of one billion camels forever rain upon your houses.

Terrorists R us, part 1600, continued

2010-12-25T14:33:00.000-08:00

They can't get enough can they. Not content with molesting little boys, the TASA now regards rape victims or elderly folk with heart conditions fair targets for their sick games.

Here is yet another TSA outrage in the long running series: LINK HERE.

Here we have a world where idiots are put in uniform by corrupt and paranoid agencies, to enforce a law that's based on phony data, all in the name of scaring the living bejesus out the public. And when idiots, incapable of independent thought, or propagandized to the point of being automatons, are put in uniform, they tend to abuse the power given to them by that uniform. It's the same the world over, and this aspect of human psychology is well known to thugs who get off on abusing people, a spectrum of inhuman conduct ranging from from simple threats, to severe torture, all the way to cold blooded murder. Abu Ghraib? Guantanamo Bay? Soviet gulags? Schutzstaffel? Same sh¡t, different assholes in uniform.

Security, security, security. Every rogue government uses this excuse to lord it over those they allegedly represent, or in democracies to take away hard-won rights, using fear as a very effective weapon to manipulate. It works every time, just like the false-flag terror technique. Sadly, populations don't want to learn, or are scared to resist tyranny: the US (and UK etc.) public are the latest sets of guinea pigs.

In the continued absence of terrorism from the phantoms popularly assigned with the blame, the TSA and other government agencies are taking up the slack. Genuine terrorists (a very rare breed) don't target airports, for reasons even a 4 year old with commonsense unsullied by propaganda, can understand.

Knowing this, the reader can travel feeling a little easier, or less terrorized, this holiday season.

"merry christmas".....

Wikileaks: Julian Assange, a corporate tool.

2010-11-29T13:53:00.001-08:00

Why is Wikleaks allowed to continue, if, according to Hillary Clinton and other officials from across the political spectrum, the "revelations" are "an attack on the world", or "threaten the national security" of the not only the US and other allied nations?

A simple possibility, or probability: The leaks posted to the New York Times and others are not really leaks at all, but deliberately managed "data dumps", a version of "limited hangout", the intelligence term used to allow public awareness of relatively mild wrongdoings, or breaches of diplomatic protocols, in order to conceal, or divert attention away from, far more serious abuses, crimes, corruption and atrocities.

This is a classic "kill two birds with one stone" case, with an inbuilt knock-on effect: The leaks are allowed to continue because it reinforces to the US public, the notion that we are a tolerant and open society. By over-hyping and bulling-up the "national security" implications and the resulting (fake) outrage over the "revelations", it gives to the public the impression that tolerance of "freedom of expression" is seen as "more important" than censorship.

If there was any information in the wiki dump that was truly damaging to, for example, the war machine (of which the corporate media is a vital component), or senior political or corporate icons (on either 'side' of the aisle), such information would be kept secret. A repeat of the Pentagon Papers cannot happen in the 2000s; the media would never permit it; there is plenty of harmless pap to keep the populace amused without biting off the hand that feeds them.

Why am I skeptical? The corporate media, especially the current batch of weasels in the boardrooms that run information dissemination policy, are by default only loyal to government when it serves corporate power, and not just US-owned corporations.

The only thing these leaks have caused is a few red faces. Period. These "leaks" are fairy dust, and have been hyped out of all proportion; there is nothing in there that would endanger "US national security", which today can be loosely translated as the financial security, both personal and corporate, of the élites to whom lawmakers answer.

Julian Assange is seen by some to be a traitor, by others a hero. My take is that he is a tool, and has probably been paid handsomely.... just like.... Osama bin Laden. If he was truly a danger to the status quo, he would not be alive now.

Katrina and Bush redux.

2010-11-05T11:06:00.000-07:00

Link to story: Bush calls Katrina photo a huge mistake

It wasn't Bush who "didn't care about blacks, or the working class poor", as commented by rapper Kanye West. As with so many events during his "presidency", the hapless Bush was kept mostly in the dark, a mere spokesperson for the real axis of evil, namely the Friedmanite neoconservative cartel behind the Bush White House.

The vehicle used to deliberately aggravate the Katrina disaster was Department of Homeland Security, an entity created in the wake of 9/11 straight from the Nazi Party's pre-WWII copybook. The DHS was responsible for deliberately cutting emergency communications lines within the areas worst affected by Katrina, including Greater New Orleans. This act of wanton sabotage was responsible for many of the 1,800+ deaths in this disaster, for which former Homeland Security head honcho Michael Chertoff should have been held responsible.

The fact that rescue units were also deliberately delayed for up to a week while people were imprisoned in the twin hell holes of the New Orleans Convention Center and the Superdome was also because of decisions made at the top levels of the Department of Homeland Security. The world watched in horror and disgust as the US powers-that-be openly displayed a similar inverted compassion for its citizens as Idi Amin, Saddam Hussein or any other rogue government one cares to mention. Rotting corpses floated in the stinking waters, people were dying on live television, fires raged out of control, and "security firms" (aka Blackwater et al) were even using storm refugees for "target practice"; the New Orleans coroner's office reported that numerous "storm victims" had died from multiple bullet wounds.

One of the hidden reasons for the appalling events in the wake of Katrina unfolding the way they did, was to perpetrate another round of "shock and awe", this time piggybacking on a natural disaster. Similarly, the SE Asian tsunami disaster had a similar after effect, in that both catastrophes were capitalized upon by big business to bribe local authorities and steal the former inhabitants' land and property by force; disaster capitalism at its worst.

Columbus: celebrating terrorism.

2010-10-10T20:24:00.000-07:00

Columbus Day is a bunch of arbitrary, Euro centric, indulgent bull biscuits. Why not equally celebrate those other European explorers, (such as Leif Ericsson) who sailed across the Atlantic to the North American continent centuries before Columbus was even born? Also, humanity has inhabited the Americas for >50,000 years, so what's so special about Columbus, and how could he have "discovered" a landmass that was already inhabited?

Columbus' principal legacies were war, slavery, pillaging, raping, looting and the spreading of lethal diseases, all in the aim of coercing the indigenous population to adhere to the teachings of a man who exhorted the tenet of "doing unto others as they would do unto you", "thou shalt not kill" and a host of other principles mandating peaceful, civilized conduct. Go figure.

Big religion is big business, and a big turn over. In other words: Screw the principles and follow the money. Nothing's changed.

9/11, nine years later. A personal reflection.

2010-09-10T22:57:00.000-07:00

The morning of 9/11 was unlike anything I have ever experienced, and I hope I shall never witness anything like it again. A friend called me from Atlanta; it was very early in the morning in Los Angeles, her frantic and scared voice jolting me out of my sleepy state..."Oh my god, quickly, turn on the TV.....New York is being attacked.....". I could still hear her voice coming out of the phone, now abandoned on the bed covers, as I fumbled for the remote. With my heart now racing and my hands shaking, I switched on the TV, to see a huge cloud of smoke and ash hanging over Manhattan, with only one of the Twin Towers still standing. I said to my friend, "let talk later", hung up and I just stared at the screen, still not quite comprehending what was going on. Then a few minutes later, the one remaining tower imploded and crumbled into dust. My thoughts were "oh my god, oh my god... all those people.. all those people...". That afternoon, I had to get away from the TV. I went for a walk on a trail in the mountains overlooking the San Fernando valley. I sat on a rock and I completely lost it.. I wept for a long time, for people I had never met, I didn't know.. it didn't matter whether I knew them or not. I kept asking myself, why, for heavens sake, why? Who could be so disconnected from their souls that they could take part in something as terrible as this?

Now, nine years later, I feel for the families and friends of the approximately 2980+ killed on that horrific morning, many of whom feel they have never had a satisfactory closure as regards their losses. the 9/11 Commission was a fraud, and the two co-chairs Kean and Hamilton have both admitted that their "inquiry" was deliberately "set up to fail".

I feel for the families and friends of the 4,200+ US troops and hundreds more from coalition countries, who were lied to by the Bush administration and the corporate media, and were killed while serving under the falsehood that they were fighting for their country and its constitution. Our service people who put their trust in the integrity of the chain of command were sent to Iraq as a direct result of 9/11, despite the fact that that war was planned well in advance of 9/11, and that fact that Iraq had as aboutas much to do with 9/11 as did Mars.

I feel for the families and friends of the 1,500 or more US troops and hundreds more coalition troops who were killed while serving and risking their lives under the lie that Afghanistan and the Taliban were responsible, or partially responsible for 9/11. Like those serving in Iraq, they too put their trust in the integrity of the chain of command, which turned out to be corrupt all the from the commander in chief through the defense secretary, thru the top generals, and hence downwards through the ranks.

I feel for the families and friends of the 1 million+ innocent civilians in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan and elsewhere in the Mid East who were killed as a result of illegal and unconstitutional orders to conduct warfare, using the emotional lever of 9/11 as a political tool. All of these wars had been planned as far back as 1999, by the ragingly Islamophobic neoconservative cartel which came to run the Bush Administration with an iron grip. Their plan was to "redraw the map of the Middle East", and this agenda is being expanded by the Obama administration, and without 9/11 (or similar), this agenda would have been an absolute no-go, even under the hardline Bush regime and the (then) republican majority in Congress and the Senate.

I feel for the first responders and their friends and families: the firemen, police, NY Port Authority, ambulance drivers, paramedics, volunteers and countless workers who ran towards danger and risked their lives in an effort to save others. They, alongside the people of Manhattan and surrounding districts were lied to wholesale by the EPA, which was under orders originating the offices of the Vice President to downplay the extreme toxicity of the dust cloud that enveloped the area, despite analyses which pointed to great potential health risks for those who were exposed. Poisonous fumes which were spewing from underground fires burned until January 2002, some 4 months later. Hundreds have died from diseases attributable to the dust and fumes, and thousands have been sickened and disabled. What did the powers that be in DC say to those brave souls who risked everything for others, and became sick?
Three words: GO FUCK YOURSELVES.

I feel for the efforts of decades worth of work by thousands of people dedicated to the enhancement of civil rights and freedom in America in the past decades. After the great sacrifices of those working for these noble causes for so long, the events of 9/11 and the irrational fear stoked by Bush White House and the Goebbels-like corporate media in tow allowed for all this great work to be undone, at a stroke, as a direct result of 9/11. It will take decades of hard work to get these rights reinstated, and the Obama Administration has done SQUAT, in its allegedly "progressive" (!!!!) to relegate paranoia and fear-mongering to a state of lesser importance than liberty and rationality.

*

I have said much about 9/11 on this board in the last few years. Most people have accused me of being a "conspiracy theorist" because I have dared to go against the flow and ask pertinent questions of my government, which, (IMHO) is not only my constitutional right, but MY PATRIOTIC DUTY AS A FREEDOM LOVING PERSON.

However, in all the tens of thousands of words I have written on the subject in this little insignificant corner of the web, not once have I accused any party, or individual, of perpetrating this appalling act of violence against innocent people. Unlike the Bush and Obama Administrations and their supine corporate media lackeys, I have not indulged myself in promoting any conspiracy theory, whether it be the popularly promoted version of "19 young Islamic hijackers with box cutters controlled by a man in a cave", or "other parties unknown within the US military/government etc" scenario. I have no proof as to the identity/identities of those who pulled off this deed, and I don't expect that in the time I have left on this Earth, given a normal life expectancy, that I will ever know for sure. And with no proof as to the "whodunnit", I am not prepared to make random accusations based on what is easiest to sell to the public....unlike the mainstream media.

One thing I do know however, is that the nation and the world were lied to wholesale about virtually everything to do with the attacks, by both our government and the mainstream media, on both the left and the right. Nine years later, these lies and myths are still ongoing, and being spewed around like so much confetti.

A National Geographic Survey only a few years ago reported the following incredible findings.. which included the following examples: 82% of high school age Americans could not locate Baghdad or Iraq on a map of the globe, despite the fact that there was a 24/7 headline war going on in that country. Almost 50% of the same demographic were unable to locate the Pacific Ocean (!!!!!!!!), the largest feature on the planet. At the same time, another poll found that 92% of all US troops stationed in Iraq believed they were there because "Saddam Hussein did 9/11". Being aware of such profound ignorance within mainstream American society, it is hardly surprising that it is incredibly simple to deceive the public, and re-write history, no matter how distorted and untrue. The complex and emotionally charged event of 9/11, unlike the simple matters of the locations of Baghdad or the Pacific Ocean, was a model subject for obfuscation and deception, in those repects.

The knowledge that a million and more innocent people from have been killed as a direct result of these lies leaves me with a profoundly sense of anger, sadness, distrust, disgust, revulsion, sympathy and frustration, all rolled into a painful stomach knotting feeling.

*

4 quotes which directly reflect the mass pyschological effects of 9/11, originated many years before, by people whose intent ranged from the most noble to the most evil: world leaders are, and have always been very aware of how people are controlled and manipulated en masse.

"If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy." - President James Madison

"Terrorism is the best political weapon for nothing drives people harder than a fear of sudden death". - Adolph Hitler

"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. It works the same in any country." - Hermann Goering, Nazi leader.

"The easiest way to gain control of a population is to carry out acts of terror. [The public] will clamor for such laws if their personal security is threatened". - Josef Stalin

The church is "on message": the method is outside the guidelines.

2010-09-08T11:13:00.000-07:00

The plan by a "Christian" (?!!) church to burn the Koran in a public ceremony is what can be logically expected from the more easily led and reactionary. In large areas of the mid-east, this type of strident opinion (often from from official bodies or even government personnel) attracts visible attention, and the reactionaries engage; the usual targets being western governments, or Israel.. and these displays are broadcast daily on our own media.

In the West however, where we live under the illusion of freedom, the process is subtle and pervasive: Rather than noisy street demonstrations, firing weapons in the air and shouting "Death to xxxxxx", the immersion is achieved entirely using quasi-reasoned intellectuality, such as essays, opinion pieces in magazines, newspapers and think tanks, interviews on television and endless talk radio shows, all put across with a measure of calm authority, but adhering to strictly thought-out boundaries and guidelines. (Mid east nations media do the same, but people in Islamic societies do not live under the same illusion of freedom, and the message has lesser mass-psychological impact.

This church has opted to employ the "hysterical", rather than "reasoned" type of technique. Here is one reason why some parties (many of whom privately endorse Islamophobia... including many high-ranking US officials) .... are getting uppity and antsy.

In other words, the Church is on message, but they are using a method that dilutes the credibility of the Islamophobic message.

Glenn Beck goes to DC. Should his supporters watch their backs?

2010-08-27T14:12:00.000-07:00

August 26, 2010: In the light of what happened in DC for a major antiwar rally on the DC Mall in 2005, Tea Partiers and Glenn Beck sycophants planning a rally in DC had also better watch their asses.

In September 2005, there was a biological weapons terrorist attack on a 400,000 strong antiwar rally, using a weaponized form of the Tularemia (Francisella tularensis) virus. Numerous bio-weapons detectors in the vicinity of the rally registered positive readings for this pathogen. Human infection with this virus, often carried by rabbits, can occur in nature, but occurrences in the US are extremely rare, ie virtually unknown: only 3 known cases in modern times.

A book fare, which was to be attended by former First Lady Barbara Bush was simultaneously taking place on the Mall, but Mrs. Bush canceled her appearance at the last minute for undisclosed reasons.

Numerous attendees of this antiwar rally reported becoming sick in the days following with symptoms that resembled anything from a "summer cold" to severe flu with a high fever. The Department of Homeland Security acknowledged the incident and the media were alerted, initially reporting it, but then dropped all reportage, apparently on orders from the offices of (former) Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff.

It is more than likely that the rally was targeted (by unidentifiable/unknown parties within the US military or security/intelligence agencies) to observe the effects of weaponized viral agents on a large crowd in an outdoor setting.

Link to the original story here: http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2005/10/18/tularemia/

Mosque at Ground Zero, and comment by Rep. Grayson

2010-08-22T11:24:00.000-07:00

Link to Rep. Grayson comments here.

The most likely purpose of such widespread publicity of the "intent to build of a mosque" at Ground Zero is to maintain the artificial public perception, fostered by the powers-that-be, with the media in tow, for decades, between Muslims and terrorism. In this case it is most likely to reinforce the publicly perceived connection between 9/11 and Islam. In the absence of hard evidence and the gradual but relentless erosion of the credibility of the original "19 hijackers and Osama bin Laden" conspiracy theory, news items are being manufactured to get the public "back on track". The US corporate media, naturally, are running with this story... surprise surprise(!!!!).

The weasels and false patriots on both the "left" and "right" will decry such notions and resort to the usual 7th grade "conspiracy theory" knee-jerks/accusations. Indoctrination/manipulation and dumbing down is one necessary ingredient in the recipe for the "endless war" agenda, into which Americans have (largely unwittingly) invested trillions since WWII.

**

As regards the notion of "Let It Happen": Legally, it is the virtual equivalent of "Make It Happen". "Accessory before the fact" , (and "accessory after the fact") to a crime... (ie prior and post knowledge of the crime) is regarded in US (and UK) law as a crime of the same gravity as actually perpetrating the crime itself, and such a crime is subject to similar degrees of punishment and sentences. I recall reading recently that "accessory to murder" in NY State might be a potential capital offense in that state.... watch your back, Rudy....

Whether the perpetrators were "Osama bin Laden and 19 Islamic hijackers", or "other parties unknown", any member of the prior administration, as well as other politicians, members of the intelligence services, US military, law enforcement, etc., who knew in advance could in theory be charged with such a crime. It should be straightforward for any competent lawyer or better, a team of criminal lawyers to prove prior knowledge without a shadow of a doubt. There is hard evidence, as well as a vast quantity of circumstantial evidence... as well as numerous witnesses, that point to such.

All it would take is the will to go ahead with pressing charges ... and therein lies the problem. ....

Castro and Ahmedinejad: pussies! Know the real enemy....

2010-07-16T23:30:00.000-07:00

Even though Iran, N. Korea and Cuba have regimes which fall way short of the definition of "civilized governance", the greatest threat the world faces since Hitler and the Nazis ran amok in Europe in 1939, is the current US-Israeli alliance, with its neoconservative power brokers at the helm.

Castro and Ahmedinejad are for sure a pair of bumbling authoritarian wannabes, but they pale in comparison to the cartel of paranoid psychopaths that are directing the US/UK/Israeli axis in their aim for "full spectrum domination" via limitless spending on the military and security sectors.

Their program calls for ordinary people of the world to be subjected to constant threats assigned to non-existent enemies, a regime of Orwellian corporate slavery and feudalism, all under the guise of protecting the people; the designers of this program have spent decades studying mass human psychology and know all the ways of keeping the people docile and malleable.

Castro, despite not only his age and failing health, but also despite the failed Marxist system he has championed for decades, is nobody's fool. We all know that communism, when forced upon a populace does not work, and he knows that too. However, at the opposite end of the political spectrum is Jungle Law Capitalism, which as we have seen several times in the last 100 years, is also prone to spectacular failures; the recent $16TRILLION "bailout" (ie WELFARE for the banking and mercantile sectors) is a perfect example. Here, we witnessed the bastions of the capitalist system being rescued by.... you guessed it... taxpayer funded socialism.

The next major meltdown will be too much for the world's financial system to handle:, and everyone apart from the 1% at the top will lose the farm. In other words, the creation of a Blade Runner type of society in which the top elite are served by a population who are slowly being deprived of their freedoms and independence, just like the frog immersed in gradually heating up a pan of water until before it knows it, the water is boiling.

To Cuba, or not to Cuba? Duplicity to the Max!

2010-07-16T15:01:00.000-07:00

Today, two people, including a former US State Department official and his partner were sentenced to life in prison and seven years respectively for spying on behalf of Cuba. Sure enough, the government of Cuba is a far from the ideal as regards liberty and democracy... but those two notions are Utopian and do not exist on an increasingly authoritarian Planet Earth, now run by a shadowy cartel of thugs and mega-criminals.

However, the rank and utter duplicity as regards the way the US treats the opposing stances on the Cuba issue is so bizarre as to be beyond belief. Although these these two people broke the law, and they knew that a life sentence was on the cards if they got caught, and spying for another nation against one's own is rightly considered treason, they probably caused no harm whatsoever to the US, as regards national security; the internationally isolated island nation of Cuba represents a threat to the US equivalent to the danger that a kitten presents to a herd of angry charging rhinoceros. On the other hand, those in the US who are active against the Cuban revolution have resorted to methods equivalent to "al Qaeda" or any other brutal terrorist gang.

Luis Posada Carriles, a close associate of both the former Bush Administration and the Miami Cuban Mafia is a serial terrorist, who has been responsible for a string of bombings over two decades, including blowing up a Cuban Air commercial passenger jet, killing all 73 people on board. He is currently living as a free man in Florida; perhaps being a close acquaintance of former Florida Governor Jeb Bush has more than a little to do with his freedom to break the law with impunity.

One of Mr. Carriles main accomplices during his campaign of terrorism was Otto Reich. Mr Reich, as listed in Wikipedia, was a former senior official in the administrations of Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush. Among other positions held, he has been the President's Special Envoy for the Western Hemisphere; Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs; United States Ambassador to Venezuela; and Assistant Administrator of the US Agency for International Development.

Reich was appointed Assistant Secretary of State for the Western Hemisphere in January 2002, and served under a recess appointment. In 2003, Bush then appointed him US Special Envoy to the Western Hemisphere. Since leaving the White House in 2004, he has headed his own international consulting firm, Otto Reich Associates, LLC, based in Washington, D.C. Reich served as a policy adviser on Latin America for John McCain's presidential campaign.

Furthermore Mr. Reich, a known terror accomplice prior to 9/11 was appointed to a senior position within the George W. Bush Administration at a time the US was SUPPOSEDLY embarking on a "war against terrorism" (?!!). No wonder that (a) people who pay attention to current affairs, (b) those who are not duped by corporate media propaganda masquerading as "news", and (c) anyone else with an IQ above 80, know full well that the "war against terrorism" is a fake, phony set of lies, flimflam, deceit and double standards, and hold the self righteous clutch of criminals and deviants within our government (both democrats and republicans) in well-deserved contempt.

Limited Hangout: If it aint broke....

2010-07-06T09:35:00.000-07:00

One guy busted for murdering unarmed civilians in Iraq? This is typical "limited hangout" strategy: Make it appear to the public that the military is following its own "rules" by charging one person with an offense that is in reality, common practice... hide a greater atrocity, or crime, by admitting a much smaller,or "limited" one.

Other classic examples of "limited hangout" include the "revelation" of the Abu Ghraib torturing... a few low ranking boots got the rap for carrying out orders which originated from the topmost levels at the Pentagon.

Then there was the infamous "August 6th, 2001, Presidential Daily Brief in which it was admitted that it was known (by the Bush Administration) that "Osama bin Laden was intent on carrying out a major attack against the USA "imminently". Again, hide a greater atrocity by admitting a degree of "incompetence", and thus placate the angry public.

There's nothing more effective than applying the rules of psychological warfare when it comes to mollifying and sedating the public angst. It's a mature science and governments (especially the US, UK, Soviet Union, Israel and Nazi Germany) have all but perfected the techniques over the last 100 years or so. Such methods are even detailed in Sun Tzu's "Art of War". The practitioners of psychological warfare have even perfected the Pavlovian programmed response against those who haven't swallowed their Koolaid... they get name-called and shouted down as "conspiracy theorists", by default.

Terrorists Я US. Again?

2010-06-19T10:22:00.000-07:00

Well I never.... who would have thunk it? Now it appears that Blackwater, or at least a group associated with the terror gang formerly known as Blackwater, has been awarded a contract by the US Government to conduct "security operations" (!) in Afghanistan.

Heck of a Job, US State Department. It's fascinating to see that our tax dollars are going towards sponsoring terrorism and terrorist groups. By the FBI's preferred definition of "terrorism", stated in the Code of Federal Regulations as “...the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.” (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85). Blackwater (aka Xe) fits the bill as much as ETA, Jundullah, the Provisional IRA or any other group one cares to mention. For the US government to fund terrorism now makes we the taxpayers guilty of the same, by association and "accessory after the fact".

Perhaps we should all be running around doing citizen's arrests upon each other, just for a laugh. After 9/11, anything goes, it seems, when it comes to rampant paranoia. On June 15, 2010, We Are Change (L.A.) organizer Bruno Bruhwiler was arrested and charged with making a terrorist threat, simply because the judge did not like his facial expression (!). I know it's barely believable, but its true... This judge clearly was targeting Mr. Bruhwiler simply because of who he is and what he represents, and the DC criminal cartel at the helm feel threatened by the real concept of freedom.

The recent attack by Israel on a humanitarian aid shipment...

2010-06-09T11:42:00.000-07:00

Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, the publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Savior in inner-city Washington. As an Army infantry/intelligence officer and later a CIA analyst, he spent almost 30 years in intelligence work. He is co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS). A recent article by McGovern contains some interesting information, regarding the opinion of Craig Murray, a former British ambassador and Foreign Office specialist on maritime law (and VIPS member). He has just weighed in with a helpful description of two clear legal possibilities, which take into account both international law and the Law of the Sea:

Possibility one is that the Israeli commandos were acting on behalf of the  government of Israel in killing the activists in international waters.* The applicable law is that of the flag state of the ship on which the incident occurred.  In legal terms, the Turkish ship was Turkish territory.* So in this case Israel is in a position of war with Turkey, and the attack by Israeli commandos falls under international jurisdiction as a war crime.   Possibility two is that, if the killings were not military actions authorized by Israel, they were then acts of murder and fall under Turkish jurisdiction. If Israel does not consider itself in a position of war with Turkey, it must hand over the commandos involved for trial in Turkey under Turkish law.* It is for Turkey, not Israel, to carry out any inquiry or investigation and to initiate any prosecutions.* Israel would be obliged by law to hand over indicted personnel for prosecution.

Will the international community step up to the plate and do what is right? Or will they succumb, yet again, to US and Israeli pressure?

Notice what happened in Lebanon in 2006, and similarly in Gaza last year? Israel could have easily flattened both regions and killed every living thing, human and animal, without even resorting to nukes... but in each case, they held off, after doing a heck of a lot of damage and killing a lot of innocent people.. and then... arbitrarily withdrew.

They are subjugating their neighbors on the drip.... nothing too drastic as to get the entire world against them, but instead, just underneath the degree of "action that the US government could not support". The Israeli leadership is extremely skilled at juggling ... they know exactly how far they can go, and what their limits are. In theory, they are quite capable of "wiping out the entire Palestinian population" within one week.... and if they could, they surely would. However, such a M.O. could scupper the Zionist dream of creating a Greater Israel in the Middle East. When boiling a frog, do it slowly, incrementally.

*

I would imagine that Craig Murray is way more qualified to venture an opinion on this incident than anyone here on this board. Furthermore, despite an awareness of the mandate to exercise POLITICAL CORRECTNESS when talking about Israel.. he still criticizes their actions as being illegal. He could have so easily weaseled out and appeased the entrenched DC/Whitehall viewpoint.

The US and Muslim nations over the last few decades...

2010-05-25T19:33:00.000-07:00

Here's a little history of the U.S. relations with Muslim nations, over the past few decades:

The extreme dependence of the US economy upon "defense" products since WWII has mandated that the US must always have a perpetual enemy against which to "justify" the continuity of that economic model, and US foreign policy has been carefully crafted over recent decades to maintain the impression of such. All was going fine for the status quo until the sudden and unexpected collapse of the Soviet Union and Eastern European "evil empire" around 1990, which left the US powers-that-be with a very snarly problem. Spotty wars in parts of Africa, Central America, the Balkans and elsewhere in the wake of the fall of the Berlin wall were not cutting the ice: greatly missing was that Perpetual Enemy against which to sell perpetual war, and "justify" a correspondingly bloated defense budget to a largely unaware public.

In response to the rapidly diminished "threat" which had been used to scare the American public since the late 1940s, the Clinton administration started cutting back on the US military budget, closing bases and curtailing certain weapons programs. This was seen as the ultimate "act of treason" on the part of a clique of powerful and by then, angry DC neo-conservative hard liners.

Out of office and frustrated in the DC political backwaters, one of the Neocon think tanks, the "Project for a New American Century" (PNAC) crafted a 147 page essay entitled "Rebuilding America's Defenses", aka "RAD", which was a radical, "in your face" jingoistic trumpet-call for the establishment of a US global empire via "total global dominance", supported by a vast increase of big government spending in the "defense" sector. The highly controversial agenda was to include such measures as a space-based weapons system, the ability to wage simultaneous wars in multiple theaters of operation, the military takeover of the oil-rich Middle East in support of our oil-based infrastructure, the concept of "shock and awe" tactics against frightened populations, a "strike first" policy sold as pre-emptive warfare, and even the development of biological/chemical weapons aimed at "specific ethnic genotypes", a sinister flashback to the Nazi regime's desire to wipe out elements of humanity which did not conform to the Hitlerian ideal.

This "RAD-ical" policy piece, which was written in 1999, was published, significantly, on September 10, 2000. One of the stipulations mentioned by the authors, was that selling this extreme agenda to Congress and the US public would be virtually impossible "absent a catastrophic, catalyzing event, like a New Pearl Harbor". The authors also were aware that the presence of an administration which was friendly towards rampant militarism was mandated; the Clinton-Gore mold had to be broken at all costs. Enter Katherine Harris, the Florida Sec. Of State, whose nefarious and illegal scheming with Database Technologies (amongst others) systematically disqualified 10s of thousands of black non-felon voters from the electoral registers, amongst other shenanigans. This wholesale election fraud was instrumental in the "neocon" effort to place a friendly administration, that of George W. Bush, in the White House. The recount in Florida was halted by the US Supreme Court just as Al Gore was about to take the lead, and right wing Supreme Court Justice Rehnquist later commented on his own decision, saying that to "continue the recount would have jeopardized the political career of George W. Bush". (!)

By late January 2001, the Bush team was in place, largely consisting of the same hardline neoconservative extremists who crafted the PNAC "RAD" document and those who were supportive of its aims. Unknown to 99.9% of the American public (who would have been understandably outraged) a significant number of these officials also happened to be dual US-Israeli citizens, committed to the Zionist ideology. This begs the question: To which nation are/were these Bush Administration officials most loyal, the United States of America, or Israel? What would the public have thought, had a significant part of a US administration consisted of, for example, dual US-Brazilian citizens? We would have been wondering what the hell was going on..... (continued below)

Anyway, as soon as President Bush was inaugurated, the new administration's talk turned towards war. Plans were drafted by late January 2001 to invade both Iraq and Afghanistan, and seven other mid-eastern Muslim nations were placed on the "to do" hit list, including Saudi Arabia, Syria and Iran. The early months of the Bush Administration passed with virtually nothing happening; the quiet was almost palpable; the mainstream media were even commenting to the effect "when is this team going to do some governing"? Questions were asked, but nobody was saying anything. During August 2001, both President Bush and VP Cheney were holed up on their respective Texas and Wyoming ranches for a month, vacations of unprecedented length, attracting abundant attention from the increasingly perplexed media.

On September 10, 2001, exactly one year after the publication of the landmark PNAC "RAD" agenda, Sec. of Defense Rumsfeld, one of the more hardline of the neo-conservative clique, stood up in the US Senate, and announced that the Pentagon had "lost track of $2.3 TRILLION (!) worth of funds, contracts and resources". $2.3 trillion is a figure greater than the entire U.S. national budget for a year and a half, and the "loss or misappropriation" of such a vast sum of taxpayer dollars would have become a national scandal greater than Watergate and the S&L collapse put together, and then squared, had it not been for the extraordinary and horrific events of the following morning.....

The 9/11 attacks made sure that this $2.3 trillion theft, the largest heist in human history, became a non-issue, conveniently forgotten and relegated to a curious footnote of history, and it has still not been investigated. Courtesy of an alleged bold conspiracy by Saudi Arabian ex-CIA operative and mujahadin "freedom fighter" Osama bin Laden and 19 young hijackers, the neo-conservative dream ticket was realized in 90 horrifying minutes on that calm, sunny morning in Lower Manhattan, DC and a field in PA, when 3000 Americans were brutally murdered. All Muslims, and all Arabs were now designated as the new evil, replacing the Communists, as the target for endless retribution; all thoughts turned to vengeance against "those who attacked us". The mainstream media eagerly joined in, baying for bloody revenge. President Bush calmly wrote in his journal that evening, that "the New Pearl Harbor had just taken place". Of course, the RAD document was central to his administration's neoconservative policy set, and US aircraft carriers and military hardware, already in place in the Indian Ocean since late July 2001, began prepping for the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan, the first on the neocon hit list, to dislodge the Taliban for blocking a deal for the Unocal oil pipeline from the Caspian Sea to the Indian Ocean oil terminals.

We all dutifully bought the neo-con koolaid without question. It has become a part of mainstream America to despise the middle eastern culture, customs and religious faith, having been conditioned for decades that the Palestinian people, for example, were all terrorists of potential terrorists. 9/11 made sure that this propagandizing and mind conditioning was extended to all brown-skinned people from that region.

The 9/11 attacks killed many proverbial birds with the one proverbial stone:

(1)Those who wanted to establish a US global empire got the go-ahead for the wars they sought.
(2) The corporations and warmongers in the "defense" sector got the perpetual enemy they craved.
(3) The Zionist/Islamophobic sections on the extreme right wing of Jewish society got America's total, unconditional and unquestioning support.
(4) The security and surveillance industry got a huge and everlasting windfall with the establishment of the new Big Government "Department of Homeland Security" and all the contracts and work connected with a fear-and-security-obsessed "post 9/11" mindset.
(5) The Bush Administration established itself as a "war presidency", a surefire winning formula for insuring two successive terms in office.
(6) Those in US society who resented the inexorable march of civil rights sat back and watched the decades of work by countless American heroes who sacrificed so much in the cause of liberty, fairness, justice and equality under the law, all evaporate in an Orwellian frenzy, as the public unwittingly followed the slippery path of sacrificing their liberties in return for some perceived, albeit phony, sense of security.

Regarding those who were blamed for the attacks: What was their apparent motivation, and what did they gain? There is only one answer: death and destruction on a huge scale:

(1) The recipients of shock and awe bombing.
(2) The systematic pillaging of their rich historical legacy, especially in Iraq where much of their priceless antiquities were looted and sold to US and European collectors.
(3) The deaths of 1.5 million of their innocent civilian population (a large proportion being children),.
(4) The wholesale destruction of their civilian infrastructure... reconstruction contracts were be awarded to well-placed private contractors close to the Bush Administration.... and much more.

We were told that the Muslims "hate our freedoms". However, all the of the real evidence runs counter to such a bizarre claim. There are between 6 and 10 million Muslims in the US. They have a higher average income than their non-Muslim counterparts, they commit proportionately less crime than non-Muslims, and as for terrorism in the U.S., it is virtually unheard of in the U.S. Muslim community. There is a 150 times less chance of being involved in a terrorist attack than being struck by lightning; and those unfortunate enough to experience such an extremely rare event will most likely be the victims of violent actions by white, non-Muslim persons. No, Mr. Cheney, the Muslim community in the US actually love our freedoms, and probably more than you do!

We tend to believe what we want to believe, and what we want to believe is largely what we are (mis)informed as reality. Our individual and collective comfort zones have been defined by a corporate media which has become totally absorbed by the dinosaur referred to by President Eisenhower as the "military industrial complex", in his famous warning speech of decades past. We as a culture now have a short, and ever-shortening attention span. The wasted lives of the Vietnam war have been a legacy of the distant past, and the Iraq war was started when highschoolers entering college were 10 years old. The energy and colorful vibrant radicalism of youth is being consciously redirected away from a natural, idealistic desire for a more just world, as was prevalent in the 1960s, towards trivia, materialism, instant gratification and grey conformity. Debate has been skillfully limited to give we-the-people the impression that we are still in control: Noam Chomsky emphasized this vital aspect of political life and discussion when he said: "The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there's free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate."

The U.S. powers-that-be, a government completely under the thumbs and direction of big business and global financial enterprise in which the US people now play virtually no part at the federal level, have the propaganda game sewn up: taking a page out of the playbook written by Goebbels and his Nazi cohorts in the 1930s, they have adopted this modus operandum, as put so plainly by senior members of the original proto-fascist experiments of the WWII period, both Nazi and Soviet:

"Terrorism is the best political weapon for nothing drives people harder than a fear of sudden death". - Adolf Hitler
"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. It works the same in any country." Hermann Goering, Nazi leader.
"The easiest way to gain control of a population is to carry out acts of terror. [The public] will clamor for such laws if their personal security is threatened" Josef Stalin.

President James Madison knew the score long before it happened so dramatically when he said: "If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy." The Muslim community all over the world are experiencing the backlash of such tyranny and oppression, first hand.

West Virginia bombing incident... more duplicity.

2010-05-22T10:04:00.000-07:00

There has just been an incident in W. Virginia, in which a bomb exploded , killing one person (probably the bomber), but apparently, terrorism has been ruled out. Other explosive devices were discovered by police... indicating that the bomber had planned multiple explosions.

This says it all: "Ferguson called the blast an "isolated incident" and said it was unlikely that the explosion was related to terrorism. We don't have much of that here."

Good heavens... someone builds a bomb, detonates it, a person is killed, and the powers-that-be consider that it's "not related to terrorism"? Earth calling West Virginia.... beep... beep....beep....

Perhaps they should be a little more honest and say it the way it is: Basically, the public in the US have been programmed and conditioned for decades that terrorism is a Muslim characteristic.. all Muslims are terrorists and all terrorists are Muslims: There is no muslim connection here, so this is merely a crime, nothing to look at here folks. If the perps' name had been Saeed (or Mohammed, or Ahmed etc.), the fearmongering mainstream media would have swarmed all over this like ants, as they did with the Times Square fake bomb incident, which didn't kill (and couldn't have killed) anyone.

How did our country get into such a duplicitous frame of "awareness"? Consider who owns the mainstream media, and then consider who provides all the translation services to the MSM as regards news from the Middle East (MEMRI), and then consider the words of William Colby, ex CIA chief, who was very frank and honest about the influence of the intelligence agencies, regarding the material that Americans are permitted to hear. Hatred and irrational fear of middle eastern people (non-Jewish of course) is one of the biggest factors here.

Labels: bomb, MEMRI, pipe

Michelle Malkin: A Candidate for the Brown Blouse Party.

2010-05-18T09:38:00.000-07:00

From the serried ranks of authoritarian shills who infest the corporate mainstream media, there are few quite like Michelle Malkin, thankfully. Limbaugh has no credibility outside of his army of drooling sycophants who believe every lie from the mouth of Mr. Duplicity himself. Similarly from the left, Arianna Huffington’s repository of hot fetid air smells pretty foul since free speech was rendered unwelcome on her website, the Huffington Post. (That's her right, but such gives us a big clue as to her character). Bill O’Reilly is all about who can shout the loudest, and Ann Coulter relies on whiny ad hominems and little black dresses. Malkin however, is an entirely different piece of work: she comes across as a “knowledgeable voice of authority, with calm, rational reasoning”... and with her cute, pouty, understated sexuality, probably has acquired many red-blooded conservative male admirers, looking for content which (on the surface) has an air of relative intelligence in contrast to the obviously infantile claptrap served up by many of her media cohorts.

This latest piece of coal, however, is a thinly disguised message of racism disguised in terms of “national security”; yet another bevy of bogus bullbiscuits by Malkin, the quintessential queen of quasi-intellectual al-qaida quackmongering. If there really were these “hordes of evil muslims” out to get the “great Satan”, then we would be continuously feeling the heat on a daily basis, as were the people of the UK when the Provisional IRA, a terrorist group (ironically funded by wealthy Irish Americans) bombed British and European “soft targets” relentlessly for decades. There are millions of soft targets available for these legendary Islamic radicals: malls, hotels, sports stadiums, theaters, markets, etc etc, all over the US, where there is little or no security, where any wannabe “jihadist” could walk in with a suitcase bomb, and blow 100 people away without even having to end his own life in the process.. and be free to repeat his action anywhere else, at a time of his choosing. No amount of security and surveillance could prevent him, if he knew the basics of how not to get caught. So, where are they all? Each intensely publicized “terrorist” incident (such as Times Square, the Underpants bomber etc etc) smacks of such gross incompetence that any teenage kid across the nation who has built a bomb from commonly available garden or agricultural products to impress his buddies, must be laughing his acne off. If this is the “most effective effort” that “al qaida” can muster, then something’s grossly wrong with the picture.

Statistically, there is a 150 times greater chance of being struck by lightning than succumbing to a terrorist’s bomb… which leads one to ask the question: “How about a war on bad weather”? Should one be be so unfortunate as to get caught in a bomb blast, the chances are that the bomber would be a white skinned, non-Muslim male. So, where are all these jihadists who supposedly, according to the neoconservative consensus (or should that be “nonsensus”), hate our freedoms? That is a good question: there are between 6 and 10 million Muslims resident in the US, and if one believes the media mavens’ rantings, the air should be perpetually thick with acrid smoke from the relentless bombs and the sharp cracks of sniper fire from Mohammed’s minions as they unleash their wrath against the suburban landscape of America. But no.. its all quiet on the literal western front, and remains so. These 10 million or so heathen who are “out to get us” apparently love our freedoms rather more those who make careers out of broadcasting fear, such as Michelle Malkin. These American Muslims show a remarkable lack of interest in violence, and instead have a higher than average annual income and commit proportionately less crime than their non-muslim counterparts. But that’s allowing facts to get in the way of an effective, highly manipulative media-administration sponsored scheme to scare us all witless and “justify” programs of endless security and surveillance, to impress upon the individual and collective “awareness” that the the interests of “protecting the public” are uppermost.

Some 3000 undocumented people walk across the largely unpoliced border from Mexico without challenge, daily. Big agribusiness benefits hugely from this endless conveyor belt of cheap labor, which is a major reason it is allowed to continue. But where are all the “al qaida” militants, supposedly awash in Saudi oil money and Iranian weapons, disguised as Jose, Raul and Pedro, taking advantage of an easy entry into the US, without having to encounter the heavy manners of airports? How many landscapers’ trucks have copies of the Koran (and Boeing 757 manuals) stashed alongside the lawnmowers, shovels and leaf blowers? Answer: None, of course.

Just for the benefit of readers who are unaware, because the following information is nor published in the corporate media, for obvious reasons: “Al Qaida”, which literally means “The Base” (or even the toilet!) in Arabic, is a construct of US Central Intelligence in the early 1980s, when it compiled a dataBASE of Mujahadeen militants eager to eject the Soviet occupiers from their homeland, Afghanistan. These were the hardline Islamic warlords, praised by President Reagan as “freedom fighters equivalent to our Founding Fathers”, who received $billions in covert funding, training, hi tech weapons and equipment during the 1980s, and who eventually prevailed over the mighty Soviet army. In the wake of the demise of the communist bloc, many of these people maintained a cordial relationship with central intelligence officials, included in their number was a young radical from a wealthy Saudi family owned construction business named Osama bin Laden. This is the same bin Laden whose family had close business dealings with the Bushes, and who according to Turkish-American FBI translator Sibel Edmonds, the Department of Justice’s most gagged witness, “worked for the US government right up until the 9/11 attacks”.

Having defined “Al Qaida”, this was the same group, headed by CIA buddyboy Osama, who allegedly lived in a cave equipped with merely a satellite-phone and a kidney dialysis machine, which was broadly blamed for the September 11, 2001, attacks, despite a complete lack of verifiable evidence with a certifiable chain of custody. Somehow, as the widely broadcast conspiracy theory goes, these 19 alleged attackers who had no military/paramilitary training, and whose “best” pilot was unable to control a Cessna in level flight, managed to hijack 4 unfamiliar, complex commercial airliners, fly lengthy and tortuous routes across the most heavily monitored airspace on the planet for up to an hour and a half without a hint of a response from the $$multi-trillion US military/security/surveillance apparatus, and successfully hit 3 of their designated targets. Really, I kid you not. One of these planes, according to Lynne Cheney, was even permitted to “circle the White House” before it flew across the Potomac to eventually hit the only portion of the Pentagon which did not contain the offices of the most senior defense and government officials, in a brilliantly conceived operation to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. They also managed to up-end several of the otherwise inviolate laws of physics, when the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center were destroyed.. including the law of conservation of momentum, Newton’s Third law of motion, and the second law of thermodynamics. But we can’t let the laws of nature get in the way of easy, convenient finger-pointing at the dark-skinned, non-Judaeo-Christian enemy that mainstream Anerica has been conditioned to hate, can we now?

So, as a result of 9/11, with all Muslims now successfully defined by the corporate media weasel-brigade as “terrorists or potential terrorists”, and the likes of Michelle Malkin now earning huge salaries by fabricating fables of fear, the public has been thoroughly and completely duped. Has anything like this ever happened before? Yes, many times, and it never fails. Notoriously, Prescott Bush’s old Eugenics buddy, a certain German fellow who went on the rampage in Europe in the middle of the previous century, followed a very similar course when his Nazi henchmen firebombed the Reichstag Parliament building in 1933, blamed the Communists, thus garnering power and scaring the German people into giving up their rights and eventually their democracy, leading to some of the worst atrocities ever committed by humanity. The scary possibility rears its ugly head: Could America ever follow a similar path towards outright tyranny and oppression? Yes of course it could, and human nature is the mechanism which could allow such. All it would take is a few well-placed bombs, the complicit corporate media, and the likes of Michelle Malkin to tell us where we can purchase the latest design in haute-couture shirts in the most fetching shade of fresh, dog-poop, brown.

2010-05-06T12:28:00.001-07:00

Time to reflecton some other peoples' words. Here are some famous quotes, and highly relevant quotations to remember whenever there's an "act of terrorism":

***

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." H.L. Mencken (1918)

"If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy."  James Madison

"The easiest way to gain control of a population is to carry out acts of terror. [The public] will clamor for such laws if their personal security is threatened".  Josef Stalin

"This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when he first appears he is a protector."  Plato

"Secrecy is the keystone to all tyranny. Not force, but secrecy and censorship". - Robert A. Heinlein

"The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them".  Patrick Henry

"The major function of secrecy in Washington is to keep the American people from knowing what the nation's leaders are doing." John Stockwell, Former CIA official and author.

"Every thing secret degenerates, even the administration of justice; nothing is safe that does not show it can bear discussion and publicity". - Lord Acton

"In times of change, the Patriot is a scarce man; brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot." -Mark Twain

"A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves" – Edward R. Murrow

"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. It works the same in any country." - Hermann Goering, Nazi leader.

"Terrorism is the best political weapon, for nothing drives people harder than a fear of sudden death".  Hitler.

***

The corporate media are doing the work of "the terrorists" by giving "the terrorists" (whoever they might happen to be, or not), maximum publicity and therefore, effect.

Al CIA Duh! At it again?

2010-05-05T17:03:00.000-07:00

In this latest case:

*Bystanders in Times Square witnessed a police drill prior to the bomb attempt. There was a bomb squad training operation ongoing in NYC at the same time. (Sounds familiar).

*The fertilizer used in this "bombing attempt" question, phosphate based, is not explosive.

*The man WAS on a no fly list, but nevertheless made it on to the flight. (It would have spoiled all the fun had he not made the flight, huh)?

*This guy is alleged to have attended "terrorist training camp" in Pakistan, and had "explosives" training.... Yet, he didn't even know that the fertilizer was incapable of either exploding, and was not even an oxidizing agent for use in a binary explosive bomb. Police first on the scene said that the bomb was "amateurish", incapable of exploding. Afterward, however, the message quickly morphed into "a deadly blast was narrowly avoided".

What's with this ongoing series on "bungled attacks" by "middle eastern dupes", who appear to make no attempt not to be caught... in other words, "go out of their way *to* get caught in the act"? Compare these to actual, real world terrorist groups, such as the Provisional IRA, ETA, and many others all around the world, which have (and had) a very consistent record of successful and deadly bombings. It's very easy to build a bomb, explode it, and not get caught. When I was in my teens, there was a boy (he was about 16 at the time) on our street who used to invite all his school buddies to watch him set off all kinds of homemade bombs. It was scary. My bedroom windows rattled on many saturday afternoons during that summer vacation. (He now works on the register at a local supermarket ).

The "incompetence" and "ineptitude" regarding every aspect of pulling off bomb attacks, on the part of the what the media and both current and recent administrations has dubbed the "world's most deadly terror gang", defies belief. Get the point? I hope so. It's obvious.

These days, the most publicized bomb attacks are spectacular failures. Or coincide spectacularly with security drills and exercises. Or even consist of threats which cannot possibly happen... such as the deadly "composite liquid explosive" which scared the living hell out of air travelers and prompted a swath of absurd carry-on restrictions. See link here.. makes for a few chuckles, if it wasn't so goddamned stupid..

It's the media who is doing far more terrorizing than any bunch of hypnotized middle eastern drones and dupes could ever hope to achieve, or what their (CIA) compromised state of awareness allows them to believe.

The Israeli hardline political right: The real menace.

2010-05-03T10:19:00.000-07:00

One of these days, given a saner world, the greatest offender regarding nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, Israel, might be brought to task. It is incredible that this one small nation is permitted to possess an arsenal of 300+ atomic weapons with no access granted to U.N. inspections or overview, develop and market internationally banned weapons, flout up to 70 United Nations Security Council resolutions in the las few decades with immunity and impunity, commit serial acts of terrorism in Lebanon and the occupied territories, all with the blessing of the U.S.

However, Iran, which has not attacked anyone in the last 275 years, whose most recent war was when former US ally Saddam Hussein attacked them, is now accused of developing nuclear weapons with zero proof, just because Israel and the gang of neoconservative thugs in Washington want yet another war, firstly to further the racist aims of Zionism, and secondly to reap huge profits for the US "defense" industry.

Unfortunately, Iran is led by a fundamentalist Islamic cleric with no credibility in the West. Ahmadinejad, a true egomaniac, seems to want to drag his country back towards the middle ages, and is playing directly into the hands of the thugs in D.C and Tel Aviv. Ahmadinejad is no fool, and that's the most worrying part.

The "bomb" attack in Times Square, New York

2010-05-02T11:03:00.000-07:00

Link to story here:

It is entirely possible that this was the work of a lone nut; perhaps a "wingnut" who got pissy because he resented paying his taxes. The US public has had a long running obsession with placing blame on "lone nuts" and they do seem to have an extraordinary degree of success when it comes to pulling off suspicious deaths, or violent assassinations etc., while the powers that be conveniently "had their backs turned".

However, there is another highly probable, albeit speculative, explanation for what just happened in New York:

This was deliberately set up and organized to appear like an "amateur" bomb stunt. This was a very similar scheme as the London Haymarket "amateur" bomb attack, which failed (of course), and a number of similar events in recent years. The "failure" was engineered into the bomb, meaning it appeared that *on the surface*, the bomb had been intended to detonate, but the clever "amateur" design and wiring made it *impossible* for the bomb to explode.

This is an extremely effective way of maintaining the fear factor. The media fall over themselves to tell everyone about "the deadly threat which had just been averted by the 'prompt, professional action by the authorities'". These fake terror attacks kill 3 birds with one stone:

(a) The notion that "terrorists are out to kill us", and the accompanying irrational fear on the part of the public, is maintained.
(b) There is no collateral damage to businesses: one can terrorize the public without having an explosion; the mainstream corporate media do the actual work of the bomb.
(c) The "efficiency" of the authorities as "protectors" is given a lot of air time, and thus the public trust in the "good intent" of the powers-that-be is maximized.

Expect a lot more of this type of thing. Of course, the False Flag attack, in which rogue elements of a nation's government (usually within the military) deliver the real deal, and attack their own nation, is still the ace card. It's as old as the hills, and it fools the public every time.*

This famous quote is always topical: "The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." -- H.L. Mencken (1918)

Two charged in NYC wth "aiding al Qaida" (?!!)

2010-04-30T12:21:00.000-07:00

Link here to story:

What another load of steaming horseshit. What exactly is al Qaida anyway? This case is a total joke, but the media are invoking the two magic words to scare people, yet again.

How about charging the entire CIA and various people with close links to the Reagan and Bush Sr. administrations who are still alive? After all, they CREATED al Qaida, which in Arabic literally means "the BASE", but in Central Intelligence circles referred to "the computer DATABASE" of militant Afghan mujahadeen warlords and Islamic fundamentalists who were fighting the Soviet occupation in the 1980s.

These militants, amongst whom was a certain character named Osama bin Laden, received $10s of billions in CIA aid, weapons, funding, equipment and training, via the US taxpayer. Perhaps the FBI should charge the the CIA with instigating terrorism... that would be fun to behold....a real spat between the agencies. Sibel Edmonds, the Turkish-American former FBI translator, became the "Justice Department's "most gagged woman in US history" when she threatened to blow the whistle on various agencies and officials regarding 9/11 and other terrorist events. In a recent interview, she claims (with a stack of evidence to verify such), that Osama bin Laden was "working for the United States until September 11, 2001. Then he went out of circulation and has not been seen since.

7/7: Almost five years since Blair-loyal thugs bombed the tube trains.

2010-04-29T16:50:00.000-07:00

Both 9/11 and 7/7 attacks were characterized by the *extraordinary* fact that drills, exercises and security operations which simulated the exact same events, were taking place at the same time, on the same day, and at the same locations as the attacks themselves. For this to have happened just once as an "innocent, unfortunate coincidence", is unlikely/improbable far beyond all reasonable expectations. The odds for the same thing to have happened twice, again by "innocent unfortunate coincidence", with such uncanny congruency, in such a short period, is stretching "great unlikelihood" towards the realm of "Not a Chance in Hell". What a bunch of sheer unadulterated, infantile gibberish these murderous state-sponsored terrorists spew forth.. and what a vicous indictment on the horrible state of public awareness, or lack thereof, that anybody believes them.

If there was any honesty or sincerity, or willingness to do their elected duty, on the part of the governments of the nations affected, these drills, exercises and security operations should have been investigated as an integral part of how the attacks were staged, rather than being viewed as separate aspects of what happened on those days. However, to adopt such a rational position would have implicated parties with far more access to power than a bunch of poor, working class "radical Muslim" kids.... thus entering a major no-go zone, on the part of both neocon-directed administrations, and the complicit cowardly mainstream media, in both the US and UK.

Both the UK's Blair government pursued the same mandate as the Bush administration: "We will not, under any circumstances, investigate". BushCorp, very reluctantly after 441 days, authorized a whitewashed, sick joke of an inquiry under the aegis of Philip Zelikow (like the Mafia investigating the Gambino family). And in the UK? Nearly five years after the 7/7/ bombings and the copycat attack shortly afterwards which failed, not a whisper, or to quote Monty Python "bugger all".

The excuse which is lamely trotted out in the expectation that a weary, frightened public will believe them is: "A public inquiry would be damaging to British national security". Yeah right... isn't that synonymous with the "personal security of mass-murderers working for and on behalf of the UK government"?

What are they so scared of? Why are they so reluctant to investigate what they describe as "al qaida's" work? (!!!!!). (Yes, that's the same Al Qaida (The BASE) that was coined by the CIA, referring to the data BASE of Afghan mujahadeen militants and fundamentalist warlords who received $Billions in funds, weapons, logistics and aid in the 1980s, during the Reagan Administration). What does such shifty, irrational behavior indicate? Guilt, guilt and more guilt. And then some guilt.

Symptoms of A Sinking Society, a crumbling empire.

2010-04-26T21:27:00.000-07:00

What a horrible tale, but one which happens with increasing regularity throughout our society:

This is all about our sinking US culture, how community has been stamped out, in favor of a attitude of "rugged individualism", where dog eat dog predatorial capitalism, homogenized corporatist conformity and consumerism rule the land. Helping a homeless person, regardless of the cause, is regarded as a no-no... homeless persons have been programmed into the public as "failures", or lesser examples of humanity by the corporate media. Helping someone in distress on our city streets is even regarded as wimpy, or even "socialism in action" in some circles. God forbid.

Laws have been enacted to criminalize homelessness, yet another extension of society's disapproval of those who fall between the ever expanding cracks in the nation's fabric. We don't like to see the unkempt, unshaven folk wheeling grocery carts because it's not pretty; it doesn't gel with the the sensibilities that we are the most advanced nation on earth, and many of us know that we are but one paycheck between the state we are in (jobs, food, roofs over our heads), and that of the unfortunates, who have lost everything, and on many occasions, through absolutely no fault of their own.

Ironically, the ones who risk everything, and fight (as they are universally misinformed by the Pentagon) for their country, are the ones who end up homeless on the streets, often mentally scarred and physically handicapped for life, in greater proportions than any other occupation. Once they have risked their lives in combat for the purposes of "guarding our national security", they are summarily discarded by the same society they swore to defend, and then left to rot. Some 35% of the homeless persons in San Francisco are combat veterans.

TSA... Totally Stupid Agents?

2010-04-19T11:36:00.000-07:00

Here we have yet another situation involving unnecessary, overbearing responses to perfectly ordinary, and obviously harmless situations and people. This time, the department of Homeland "Security" (sic) is the guilty party (surprise, surprise), and the agency at fault is TSA. Good lord, as if. (lol).

Link to story

I am not implying that every TSA agent is a heavy handed thug, of course. Most people who wrk for government agencies are perfectly decent folk who want a peaceful happy existence. The fracas in the article, however, results from human nature in action; there are plenty of people who abuse the power of the uniform they wear, because the exercise of this power gives them stimulation and pleasure. Some even derive sexual pleasure from such. I had a potentially similar experience in my local tax office a few days ago, in which a federal agent became extremely aggressive to me just because I was wearing sunglasses. (As if sunglasses are a threat, or could be used as a weapon?). See my previous blog entry for the details...

Combine this tendency for (a significant proportion of) people in uniform to use that power to "lord it" over others, with the climate of fear that that has deliberately created (a form of terrorism) by federal agencies, and promoted wholeheartedly by the corporate media, and the overall forecast for the future looks stormy indeed.

The most effective way of imposing a maximum security, "police" state, "Big Brother", or surveillance-orientated society, is for the powers-that-be to generate and promote fear amongst the populace, and then use the complicit media to simultaneously "inform" the the populace that they face a "great danger", and by telling the public that "we are going to protect you from it".

Naturally, so as not to distract the public from their individual and collective comfort zones, the restrictions on rights and liberties, and concurrent increased "security" measures, are added in very subtle increments, so as to give the overall (mis)perception that things are carrying on as normal.

The technique works flawlessly every time: warnings by the perceptive minority and skeptics of the "benevolent nature of government" are either name-called as "unpatriotic" and "paranoid", or they are labeled as "conspiracy theorists" by the media.

Two famous quotations, regarding the encroaching political climate change-for the worse, are highly appropriate:

(1) "The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." -- H.L. Mencken (1918)

(2)"If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy." - - President James Madison

There's a category 5 hurricane headed for the proverbial coast. We keep on being warned, and we keep ignoring the warnings. That's human nature in action.

Tax Day, 2010

2010-04-17T11:55:00.000-07:00

Tax Day. April 15, 2010.

Alongside millions of others, I have always been a procrastinator, regarding the preparation of tax returns; this year was no different....or so I thought until I showed up at the tax office to file an extension. The tax office here in downtown "Springfield"(!) is a small facility on a quiet leafy street, and in my past experience, staffed by friendly and helpful employees. The format of the office had altered somewhat since the last few times I have been there, and on this occasion, there was a set of yellow arrows directing those who required forms to another area along the side of the building. I started following the arrows, only to be told by a gentleman sitting n a low wall outside the main door that "the entrance is here". So, now a little perplexed (it was early in the morning, and I hadn't had any coffee!), I doubled back and headed towards the door. Sure enough, I saw the tax forms in their usual places, but blocking the path was a large, armed federal agent, looking at me with a suspicious gaze, who asked aggressively "what do you want"? I replied that I was looking for forms,and he said "go round the side of the building". Was this a case of "too many chiefs"? ... So I followed the set of yellow arrows, which led me to a small line of people waiting for forms, and there was the same agent, obviously waiting for me, who barked: "Lift your shades!" I assumed he was directing this towards me, so I pulled my sunglasses off. I offered an apology, adding that I wasn't aware that it was illegal, or non-permissable to wear shades at the tax office. He barked again: "you're on federal property". I wondered about what possible dangers that sunglasses posed specifically to federal property, when they are regarded on all other parts of the globe, if not the remainder of the visible universe, as a perfectly innocuous device designed to protect, rather than assault. But wisely, I decided not to take this line of inquiry any further, which led me another thought: Why would I be so bothered about exercising my first amendment right to ask a perfectly legitimate question to an employee of we-the-people? Someone with more balls (and perhaps less common sense) would have said "WE pay your salary, don't ever forget it".

The goon disappeared, leaving me and the group alone to do our business; as if on cue, the 4 or 5 people who were waiting in line all turned around and looked at me, rolling their eyes. One was a man, who gave me the impression of being an ex-Vietnam veteran. He said: "I love this country, but I'm now feeling like I want to leave; ever since Reagan declared war on the ordinary people, this country's been going down the toilet". I replied that the same thing happened in parallel in the UK under Thatcher. We all chatted as a group for a few minutes , echoing a similar set of feelings until the lady dealing with the forms returned. She was the polar opposite: friendly and almost overbearingly helpful, in stark contrast to the fresh-faced "Little Hitler" in his blue uniform, who is obviously thoroughly enjoying his "15 minutes of power". Soon, I am on my way home, but in that short time, I came to one more realization that we as a nation are under the gun, just like in the tale of the proverbial frog immersed in water which is being heated up very gradually until boiling; the frog doesn't realize its fate until it is far too late too late to do anything about it.

Only a few weeks ago, an alleged "disgruntled tax rebel" had flown a small airplane into the IRS building in Austin TX. The circumstances behind this attack remain peculiar and somewhat contrived, to say the least, but the effect of this incident was to "justify" the placing of armed guards at all IRS facilities. This is yet another instance of the powers-that-be using a high profile incident to "justify" the "militarization" of society, this time the IRS, using the ever effective mantra of "security" as an excuse. Perhaps this is all in the effort of getting the public "used" to the notion of armed guards everywhere? Airports are the model: this worked a treat with 9/11 and a clutch of bizarre incidents on planes which have followed on a regular "drip feed", presumably to keep the public on edge. What will be next, one wonders? Buses and trains are a likely probability..... Imagine the following, somewhat likely scenario, in which a false-flag attack by a small team of highly trained psychopaths (from the Pentagon or 3 letter government agency?) bombs Amtrak or Greyhound, the Muslims or other disfavored group-du-jour are blamed, as a matter of course, with the mainstream media donning the ever-present kneepads to regurgitate the bullshit without asking a single relevant question. The result would be another huge boon to private security firms like Blackwater etc; they would receive fat government corporate-welfare checks to put in place a "maximum security" system to stop, search and terrorize passengers on demand, just like currently in Iraq, or Germany in the 1930s.

At some point in the future, perhaps the "no sunglasses on federal property" edict will be expanded to include city streets, sports stadiums, beaches, shopping malls and anywhere else accessible to the public, aka we the people. Naturally, sunglasses are not the problem, it's the eyes and faces of the people behind the glasses that have been designated the problem. Sunglasses are assigned problem status because they get between the people and the surveillance cameras of the paranoid Orwellian security obsessed society that is emerging. Bit by bit, we are being led down a path that leads to a place in which nobody wants to be, and a place in which those leading the charge won't ever have to experience. To deny such always always evokes the same milksop reaction from the fearful masses: the following quotations illustrate:

"Great spirits will always encounter violent opposition from mediocre minds." -Albert Einstein

"In times of change, the Patriot is a scarce man; brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot." -Mark Twain

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." -H.L. Mencken (1918)

***

YOUR PAPERS, PLEASE!!!!

A Plague of War Criminals.

2010-04-09T11:33:00.000-07:00

Guantanamo Bay prison camp detainees INNOCENT.

"The Times", a solidly establishment UK newspaper publishes this. Will this get any mention in the US press. Silly question, undoubtedly... unless it is a case of "limited hangout". This is the stategy of admission of a limited amount of wrongdoings, in order to distract the public from the gnarlier facts. The classic recent case was the exposure of the "August 6th, 2001 PDB" (presidential daily brief), in which Bush was warned that "Osama bin Laden was determined to strike within the US". This was an incredibly brilliant strategic move on the part of the Bush Admin. and intelligence community, where they not only admitted a certain amount of "incompetence", to promote the popular notion that "government is inefficient" but also effectively laying the blame on OBL and "al Qaida" in the same statement.

But this does not help the fate of those unfortunate innocents still languishing in brutal custody, and probably still being tortured recreationally by the thugs that work there. Bush and company knew these people were innocent. Yet they were promoted by the entire US/UK establishment as the "cream of Al Qaida"... the ones who "attacked us", and all that ridiculous conspiracy fantasy. These have been over 700 people who were locked up in the Guantanamo Bay concentration camp, some now for more than 8 years, most were tortured. Some have died in custody either by killing themselves, or at the hands of those in the employ of the US Government.

Quote:
..."Colonel Wilkerson, a long-time critic of the Bush Administration’s approach to counter-terrorism and the war in Iraq, claimed that the majority of detainees — children as young as 12 and men as old as 93, he said — never saw a US soldier when they were captured. He said that many were turned over by Afghans and Pakistanis for up to $5,000. Little or no evidence was produced as to why they had been taken.

He also claimed that one reason Mr Cheney and Mr Rumsfeld did not want the innocent detainees released was because “the detention efforts would be revealed as the incredibly confused operation that they were”. This was “not acceptable to the Administration and would have been severely detrimental to the leadership at DoD [Mr Rumsfeld at the Defence Department]”.

There are still almost 200 people at Guantanamo, imprisoned without charge. No charges implies innocence. Secret military tribunals (kangaroo courts) implies having to use false evidence which cannot be challenged, in order to gain "convictions". And the Obama Administration is as equally guilty as the Bush Administration.

In a slightly more just and sane world, Obama, Biden, Pelosi, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and a large clutch of influential politicians on both sides of the aisle, by all reasonable standards, should be charged and put on trial for war crimes... among the many possible charges, authorizing (or being accessory to) the wholesale torture of people, known to be innocent. But since these politicians are above the law, immune from the law, and are permitted by our fatally flawed system to do whatever they like with impunity, is the initiation of prosecution proceedings possible? Does anyone with any power in DC have the political will, or courage, to go there? Nope. One can hear the doors of justice clang shut as they all close ranks to protect each other.

But we do not live in a sane world... reality is too edgy for most who prefer a fuzzy, escapist, media-promoted illusion that the two parties are (a) in opposition to each other (b) their members in Congress have the American peoples' interests at heart and represent us (c) that democracy actually exists and (d) we are all about freedom and justice.

A pox on their houses.

Afghanistan and Democracy? What a bunch of BS...

2010-04-03T17:36:00.000-07:00

Read the above article, and then look at some of the asinine commentary! The "lead" poster, probably a plant, talks about "our boys dying to give Afghanistan democracy". WTF? This is a total lie, on every count. Our troops were lied to from the get go. If they knew the truth, there would be an all out mutiny.. and the same regarding Iraq.

Both of these wars (and the upcoming one against Iran) were started illegally, for (a) corporate profit, benefiting wealthy elites in the oil, defense and security industries (b) because a clutch of paranoid Neocons in DC have a pathological hatred for brown-skinned middle easterners of the Muslim faith,which of course includes those of Arabic and Persian ethnicity (c) because of 9/11, even though there is NO link between the Taliban and 9/11, or even Osama bin Laden and 9/11, that is, according to the FBI... and (d) to protect the security of the State of Israel... that is, according to former White House official and 9/11 Commission and Executive Director Philip Zelikow in a July 2002 speech at the University of Baltimore, MD. 25,000 US troops and two aircraft carriers were in the region, ready for action, in July 2001, some 6 weeks prior to 9/11.

"Democracy" in Afghanistan was never on the table: it was just being ballyhooed as "feel good" claptrap to mollify the misled and lied-to public and prey on their comfort zones. Afghanistan has never known "democracy" and doesn't even *want* democracy... and this "justification" can never stand up regarding anyone who knows any history; the US has spent huge resources, energy and effort into overthrowing democracies and installing thugs and dictators.

Anyone who believes that "our troops are there to help the Afghan people and give them freedom" ... think again. You have been duped. It's bullshit... a big fat lie to make you feel as if your taxpayer dollars are going towards worthwhile causes. They are not, they never have, and they never will, especially while have a bunch of serial criminals and sociopaths running... or should I say... *wrecking* ... this country.

More on secrecy.

2010-03-31T20:34:00.000-07:00

There is a powerful new appeal by the families of 9/11 victims to have the "suspects" tried in a real court of law, rather than the fakery of a military tribunal.... a euphemism for a kangaroo court

Military tribunals/kangaroo "courts" are secret trials, the bailiwick of dictatorships and repressive, totalitarian regimes; the regime that was in power when the 9/11 attacks happened, which authorized the use of military "tribunals" was as near to totalitarianism as this country has ever seen.... and little or nothing has changed with the new occupants of the White House... barring a superficially more "friendly" appearance. These type of fake trials always have a predetermined verdict (ie guilty) and are merely a formality, to allow the government in question to conduct rigged quasi-legal procedures minus the inconvenience of public scrutiny.

The effort to keep the 9/11 trials in a military tribunal setting has nothing to do with national security. It also has nothing to do with the constitutional right of any person in this country accused of a crime to a fair trial trial by a jury of their peers. It has nothing to do with any sense of real justice, in any society with a pretense at being civilized. It has everything to do with keeping the facts of the event in question (9/11) secret, and to erect a wall of silence (ie protection) around those in elite military and political circles who likely had a part to play in the planning, organization, and execution of the attacks, and those who played an part in actively preventing the timely response by those entrusted to defend our airspace.

It is highly unlikely that the Obama Administration was ever *genuinely* prepared to conduct the 9/11 trials in a real, legal, open civilian court-of-law setting... because of the potentially highly damaging cross examination, question and points of law that might be raised by the defense. Furthermore, the lead "suspect" in the trial, Khaled Sheikh Mohammed, was water-boarded 180+ times... and in US law, water-boarding is considered torture; evidence obtained by such abuses is not permitted in a real court of law. Just for the record, a number of Japanese military personnel convicted of torturing US soldiers in WWII using water-boarding techniques were sentenced to death by hanging in the Tokyo Trials. What is so different about the current conduct of our own CIA thugs, compared to that of the Japanese some 60 years ago? Quick answer: There is no difference.

I am no fan of the death penalty, but such duplicity destroys what little credibility our senior officials have left to offer.

Protesting at troops' funerals: It does not get much lower than that.

2010-03-31T10:25:00.000-07:00

The article linked to above make me wonder just what is more unrealistic? The notion that US troops "die in order to preserve America's freedoms", or that "God hates fags"? The first is factually plain wrong, and the second is infantile.

First, there hasn't been a war against a foreign country since US troops were fighting Nazi Germany, that was to "preserve freedom", in that case against the scourge of Naziism, the rise of which, ironically, was fostered and funded by some of America's wealthiest and influential families and business leaders, such as the Fords, the Bushes and Harrimans. For an infamous example, Prescott Bush (father of President George H.W. Bush) was busted twice under the Trading With The Enemy Act for doing business with the Nazis. Every other war since WWII which the US has either started or become involved, has been for the benefit of private, corporate interests, both national and international, and absolutely *NOTHING* to do with freedom or democracy. The US, especially with the efforts of the CIA, has done far more towards supporting or installing thugs and dictators, and overthrowing elected democracies, all on the US taxpayer dollar.

Would the public approve they they knew? What would the troops think if they knew what they were REALLY fighting for? Perhaps that is why there has been a huge effort in recent years to consolidate the mainstream media: the 5 big corporations that are involved with the "news" dissemination business are intimately enmeshed with the military industrial machine, in other words, those business entities which get enriched from the business of war.. and the more war, unrest and terrorism that can be generated and fostered, then the richer these businesses and their stockholder get. General Smedley Butler, America's most decorated Marine was the real hero in this area of business: He told the public it the way it really is in his excellent brief tome "War is a Racket".... and this was many decades ago. Since then, it's all changed, and for the worse.

It's a shame that members of the US military who end up in the danger zones are universally and blissfully unaware of the scams for which they are being ordered to risk their lives, while being disinformed that their efforts and heroism are "patriotic".

Secondly, regarding the "God Hates Fags" idiocy: If these people are quoting Leviticus, then why single out gay people... why not those who eat shellfish, or those who don't hold their wives in slavery? If aberrations to the norm are so disquieting to these folk, why don't they go after left-handed people, or albinos, or those who are very tall, or very short? There's also the possibility that perhaps the Rev Fred Phelps and his Westboro Baptists are closet gays, and hate themselves... and thus have to take their irrational venom out on others?

CIA: "Cocaine into America".. and thats a walk in the park.....

2010-03-28T23:46:00.000-07:00

The A.P. investigates the CIA? What a pile of sheer unadulterated weasel-droppings. Remember what former CIA director William Colby said in recent years? "The CIA owns everyone of any significance in the US media". From what anyone with a semblance of sentience must be aware, the A.P. represents a more than "significant" slice of the US media. OK, the fox investigating the henhouse has become de rigeur in the US since 9/11, but can't anyone in our cowardly "Baghdad Bob" style mainstream 'media' (!) say anything sensible about this disgusting state of affairs, without resorting to 4th grade name-calling and infantile gibberish? Obviously not, because (a) they have no balls, (b) no sense of patriotism (c) no idea of the difference between right and wrong, and (d) have become so consolidated that they are as dumb and dense as the proverbial rock, and can't even distinguish between their asses and their elbows.

Come on folks! WAKEY goddamned WAKEY! The United States has been under a "slow-motion coup d'etat" since that fateful day 8.5 years ago, and the CIA have played a huge and willing part in it. This evil agency, pretending to "serve America" was founded on the principles of Nazi Germany, and many of its earliest recruits came straight out of Hitler's vicious regime... and for the last 6 decades, they have perpetrated a reign of violent acts all around the world, wrecking democracies, assassinating decent leaders, importing and distributing dangerous narcotics wholesale, supporting vicious thugs and dictators, and masterminding false-flag terrorist acts, all of which have compromised our national security, and all at massive annual expense for we-the-unrepresented-people.

Essentially, this rogue agency has become the quintessential "enemy of the state" since its inception after WWII, one of the many metastasizing cancers in Washington DC that are relentlessly eating away at the fabric of civilized society.

	Hijackers on board.	Remote Control.
Takeover of the planes
	*
		*
	*	*

WOT on Earth?

Falklands Flareup? Meddling in the Malvinas?

WTC Building 3 unable to find tenants

Freedom Fries? Yes it does.

Guest Entry: "Conspiracy Theory", by Wing Cdr. Douglas Manley (RAF Ret'd)

The False dilemma scenario and the alleged 9/11 hijackers.

Pax Americana? Another piece of Orwellian doublespeak.

Blair: the DOs and DON'Ts of democracy (yikes)

9/11: What on Earth is up with Chomsky?

Anonymous: the Mexican Cartels to be targeted?

Julian Assange and Michael Moore... two of a kind?

Dr. Steven E. Jones, a hero of our time.

US troops out of Iraq by the end of 2011?

Corporate America... The rotten apples destroying the whole crop

The Underwear "Bomber"... young FBI patsy kid turns traitor on us

Murder by Presidential Decree.

Alex Jones

Anwar al Awliki... his fate, anyone's fate.

Anwar al Awliki... his fate, anyone's fate.

Palestinian statehood....

Israel and Palestine....

On Hurricane Katrina's 6th Anniversary: Hurricane Irene.

The Great Deceivers, Part 92,347,641

Who controlled the planes on 9/11?

How we are all manipulated by lies and framing, by the powers that be.

8 Reasons why Young Americans Don't Fight Back: How the US Crushed Youth Resistance.

Norway: Terrorism or Violence?

Norway: Terrorism or Violence?

Norway: "all Muslims, all the time". Uh oh. Ooops.

Anthrax: FBI debunked by DoJ (?!!)

Fukushima.. the censorship of news in the US continues apace....

The new yellow journalism: Goebbels would be proud

Bob Graham: "Keys to the KIngdom".

WTC Building 7's destruction... and *Muslims*?!! ?!!

Netanyahu and his buddies in the US Congress

FBI: protecting, NOT prosecuting, the 9/11 and anthrax killers.

Jonathan Kay: Siding with Terrorists

Bin Laden: milking the bull

They couldn't find bin Laden? Yeah, pull the other one.

Obama and Osama. No so far apart as one would like to believe.

The boogeyman's alleged demise.

Osama is dead, take #312

They're at it, again.

CIA in LIBYA, Afghanistan.

Terrorists R US, part 3,953

A thought on Ayn Rand...

Egypt... Some less hopeful commentary....

Dystopia and duplicity gets personal

Cheney: evil by any definition.

Who hates Arabs? Most of the US... it makes us feel good.

Go Egypt! Freedom is yours, if you can ignore the weasel commentary from Hillary et al!

Pastor Jones, the Koran Burning Preacher.

Tunisia, another light comes on in the darkness.

Won't someone tell me what the birds say?

Terrorism and America's dystopian journey.

Terrorists R us, part 1600, continued

Wikileaks: Julian Assange, a corporate tool.

Katrina and Bush redux.

Columbus: celebrating terrorism.

9/11, nine years later. A personal reflection.

The church is "on message": the method is outside the guidelines.

Glenn Beck goes to DC. Should his supporters watch their backs?

Mosque at Ground Zero, and comment by Rep. Grayson

Castro and Ahmedinejad: pussies! Know the real enemy....

To Cuba, or not to Cuba? Duplicity to the Max!

Limited Hangout: If it aint broke....

Terrorists Я US. Again?

The recent attack by Israel on a humanitarian aid shipment...

The US and Muslim nations over the last few decades...

West Virginia bombing incident... more duplicity.

Michelle Malkin: A Candidate for the Brown Blouse Party.

Al CIA Duh! At it again?

The Israeli hardline political right: The real menace.

The "bomb" attack in Times Square, New York

Two charged in NYC wth "aiding al Qaida" (?!!)

7/7: Almost five years since Blair-loyal thugs bombed the tube trains.

Symptoms of A Sinking Society, a crumbling empire.

TSA... Totally Stupid Agents?

Tax Day, 2010

A Plague of War Criminals.

WTC Building 7's destruction... and Muslims?!! ?!!