Saturday, March 24, 2012

A Tin Foil Hat Day, We All Need More of These

© unknown
A Tin Foil Hat Day, We All Need More of These by Gordon Duff

Like most Americans, I work to make a living though technically at what used to be “retirement age.”  I think retirement is overrated.  

For years my boss was a World War II vet who knew half the leaders in the world.  Without him and his patience, I would be a different person.  If you aren’t at least 60, to me you are a kid.

You see, those of us who grew up in the 50′s and 60′s weren’t like any other generation.  We stayed kids.

Our bodies aren’t the same but we still ride motorcycles, box, hike and climb, listen to rock and roll and push ourselves to limits that we hate to admit are lessening. For those of us who are Vietnam veterans, though others since have similar experiences, we have been burying friends for 45 years.

We look back to 1963, all of us were dreamers whether in high school or college or even the military.
We were going to change the world, build a life for ourselves and family that didn’t involve stealing and cheating but doing that “ask not what your country can do for you….” thing Kennedy talked about.
Some of us that have traveled the world, perhaps blown a bit of it up, grew up kids in factory towns across America.  Our life choices were limited, or so everyone told us, go to the auto plant  or phone company, do what dad did, live in the old neighborhood, keep the old friends around.  Sometimes this looks like it might have been a good life and it was for those able to “pull it off.”

The factories closed, waged plummeted, the old neighborhoods became war zones, friends moved away and the “greed is good” generation set a new standard, America became a land of hucksters and thieves, of cowards and phonies.

It wasn’t as though we were a lesser people, not hardly but we let ourselves be led by those we never would have played with as children. Then we had common sense, we knew snitches and weaklings when we saw them.  They now run our country.

Read more..includes video

Best UFO Sighting Of 2012 So Far

Mar. 22, 2012: Best UFO Sighting Of 2012 So Far - AnonymousFO


Source - Hunterfir
Link to the Original -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PA_T4YhwHL8

This UFO was caught by a man being pulled on a sledge by his sister when he was recording for some random family footage. below I have posted a link for the full interview with the guy that caught the UFO.

Full Interview with the guy that recorded it all -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qM2pE6c4rX8

Sarkrazy Uses Terror To Kill Free Speech And Democracy, Will Obama Follow Suit?

© The Excavator
Sarkozy is koo-koo krazy.
Sarkrazy Uses Terror To Kill Free Speech And Democracy, Will Obama Follow Suit? by Saman Mohammadi

Sarkrazy is so predictable.

First, the totalitarian fascist State kills kids and innocents, and then it uses their deaths to kill free speech and democracy.

Below are two reports from Russia Today and Infowars.com about Sarkrazy's attack on free speech and free thought. Remember: the bodies of the victims of the latest state terror incident in France have not even been buried yet. This is sick and disturbing. This is political exploitation of murder and tragedy at its most vile.

RT: "Sarkozy: Visiting hate and terror websites will be punished," March 22, 2012:
The Toulouse murders and the operation of the alleged killer might bring additional political scores to Nicolas Sarkozy ahead of the future presidential elections, writer Diana Johnstone told RT.

"He [Sarkozy] has completely dominated the television screens for a couple of days as a result of this and shoved the other candidates into the shadows at the time when it was supposed to be the beginning of the campaign," she said. "So as a matter of fact, Sarkozy just by being present everywhere has already profited from this."
Kurt Nimmo: "Sarkozy: Prosecute and Imprison Readers of "Extremist" Websites," March 23, 2012:
French president Nicolas Sarkozy didn't wait long to exploit the terror rampage of Mohammed Merah. Soon after Merah's death in a stand-off with police, Sarkozy said French citizens who visit "extremist" websites should be treated the same way as those who look at child pornography.
. .
"Trying to criminalize a visit - a simple visit - to a website, that's something that seems disproportionate," Lucie Morillon of Reporters Without Borders told the Associated Press.

Morillon noted that in order for Sarkozy's law to be enforced, the internet would require new surveillance technology. "What's especially worrying for us is how you are going to know who's looking at what site. Does this announcement mean the installation of a global Internet surveillance system in France?" Morillon said.
Sarkrazy, Cameron, and Obama are following the same foreign policy and domestic agendas. They were together in the war against Libya, and they'll be together on popularizing and legitimizing Internet censorship. So we should expect President Obama to make the same type of anti-free speech statements in the wake of a tragic state terror attack in America in the near future.

The national security terrorists behind the Obama administration will stage another terror attack in America to make the American people rally around the President. In July of 2011, Paul Joseph Watson reported that, "Democratic strategists have said the only thing that will save his presidency is a domestic terror attack on the scale of Oklahoma City or 9/11."

Watson quoted Democratic strategist Mark Penn, who told MSNBC's Chris Matthews in 2010: "Remember, President Clinton reconnected through Oklahoma, right? And the president right now seems removed. It wasn't until that speech [after the bombing] that [Clinton] really clicked with the American public. Obama needs a similar defining moment."

So far, the Obama administration hasn't used the tactic of state terrorism to galvanize the American people, but it is an option that remains on the table, ready for use at any time. The state terrorists in Washington are always looking for the right moment to strike. And, as we learned from the 9/11 experience, they move super quickly after an explosive staged event, passing laws that were previously unpopular and unacceptable.

When the state terrorists strike again in America they will immediately pass new anti-social media and anti-free speech laws. Last summer, in the midst of the London riots, Cameron proposed legislation to censor social media websites under the guise of fighting looters and criminals. That crisis was a shadow of what is to come.

Imagine what will happen in the wake of a new state terror attack in America. Martial Law will become a reality. Obama will officially declare that America is in a state of emergency, and his partners in crime in England and France will follow his example. Or events towards the public declaration of Martial Law may unfold from the other side of the Atlantic.

On the face of it, the censorship of terrorist websites and crackdown on the use of social media by looters and criminals seems justified and appropriate. But the whole thing becomes a farce when we learn that Western governments helped to create the terrorists in the first place, and are responsible for the dismal economic conditions which give rise to looters and criminals.

As you and I know, their war isn't really against terrorists and looters. Their war is against free speech and free thought. Western governments are cracking down on dissent and justifying their thuggery by equating dissent with hate speech. They can't stand democratic criticism of their criminal policies that have been legitimized by the Global War on Terrorism.

There is the fear that alternative news websites will be classified as hate speech and categorized as terrorism websites, and subsequently banned by government censors. In fact, that has already happened to some degree in some places. In numerous hotels in the United States you can't access Infowars.com. It is very likely that this policy will be implemented system-wide across the West against anti-government and pro-freedom websites.

But we shouldn't give in to this fear. Only criminals fear the law and the government. Alternative news websites are the last bastion of free speech and free thought in the West. The universities and the press have failed to inform the public about false flag terrorism and crimes of conspiracy against Western democracy and human rights.

So we shouldn't watch what we say. Telling the truth is not a sign of extremism or hate speech. The insane crooks in governments that commit terrorism against their own populations should watch what they do, and prepare to face the legal consequences for their crimes against humanity.

President Obama: What Is He So Afraid Of?

© ivarfjeld.wordpress.com
No local news concerning this executive
order. Nothing was aired. Only celebrity
news and anchors tasting the food
from their guest chef.
President Obama: What Is He So Afraid Of? by Simon Black

Quietly, and with little fanfare, President Obama signed a "National Defense Resources Preparedness" Executive Order on Friday. As the name suggests, the order intends to shore up the country's national defense resources in advance of a national emergency.

To be fair, this is not the first time that such an order has been written. Presidents Bush (II), Clinton, Reagan, and even Eisenhower provided directives in the same spirit as President Obama's order - providing some level of government commandeering in times of national emergency.

In the past, these orders have related to things like production capacity for defense contractors, or giving FEMA authority to resolve disputes between other departments in federally designated emergency areas.

President Obama's order, however, takes things much, much further.

(1) The order vastly expands the role of Homeland Security... as if these knuckleheads didn't already have too much influence in people's lives. Apparently highways, shopping malls, airports, bus stations, Wal-Marts, hotels, train stations, etc. aren't enough for DHS. Now the Secretary of DHS will:

a) "advise the President on issues of national defense resource preparedness".

This one is really clear. Under normal circumstances, matters related to defense would fall under the Secretary of Defense... or perhaps the National Security Advisor. Giving such responsibility to DHS suggests that the government is expecting an emergency from within.

b) "provide for the central coordination of the plans and programs... under this order, and provide guidance to agencies assigned functions under this order..."

DHS now has authority to direct the emergency preparedness of every other government department. The Secretary of Homeland Security has effectively become the Emergency Czar.

c) have oversight of "all other national defense programs, including civil defense and continuity of Government."

In case it wasn't clear before, the people who molest children and radiate travelers will have total and complete control in some event defined as a national emergency in the sole discretion of the President.

(2) The order further provides for an effective nationalization of the entire US economy in the event of an emergency.

The Secretary of Labor, for example, will "collect and maintain data necessary to make a continuing appraisal of the Nation's workforce needs for purposes of national defense" and then "formulate plans, programs, and policies for meeting the labor requirements of actions to be taken for national defense purposes."

In other words, the Labor Department becomes the Ministry of Plenty, and all the good little citizens will be forcibly reallocated to other jobs. This turned out really well for the Soviets.

(3) The purpose of this order, for example, is to "take actions necessary to ensure the availability of adequate resources and production capability, including services and critical technology, for national defense requirements;"

It goes on to list 'adequate resources' to include things like:

(i) "all forms of energy including petroleum, gas (both natural and manufactured), electricity, solid fuels... solar, wind, other types of renewable energy, atomic energy", etc.

(ii) "all usable water, from all sources, within the jurisdiction of the United States, that can be managed, controlled, and allocated to meet emergency requirements..."

(iii) "all commodities and products... that are capable of being ingested by either human beings or animals..."

(iv) "drugs, biological products, medical devices, materials, facilities, health supplies, services and equipment required to diagnose, mitigate or prevent the impairment of, improve, treat, cure, or restore the physical or mental health conditions of the population."

Hmmmm. Food. Water. Energy. Medicine. Security. All the stuff that human beings need at a basic level to survive. Except that Obama's executive order puts all of these resources under control of the government and allocates them exclusively to meet the needs of government.

In this capacity, we are all merely subordinates to the interests of the state... and it should be absolutely clear at this point where normal people stand in the grand pecking order: Citizens are resources to be exploited and sacrificed in order to ensure the continuity of government.

In the event of some catastrophe, you will be stripped of basic resources so that the government can survive. A free society cannot exist under a system in which the state exercises such control... or has the authority to exercise such control.

Taken in conjunction with the NSA's new Utah spy center (which will collect and archive the complete contents of every email, tweet, Facebook post, Google search, phone call, and text message) and the National Defense Authorization Act, it's clear that the Obama administration is expecting trouble from within.

And with good reason. By every possible calculation (except flat-out fraud), the US government is completely insolvent, and its balance sheet is growing worse by the day. The dollar is beginning to be seriously challenged as the global reserve standard, and every effort politicians make to 'fix' the economy only makes things worse.

As a matter of convenience, people are willing to deal with a lot of pain. They'll suffer through wars, recessions, and all sorts of national unpleasantness. But the moment that rapidly decaying economics and shortages prevent people from being able to put food on the table for their families, they rise up. Just look at the Arab Spring.

This is all playing out with nearly perfect historical precision. Time and time again throughout history as once great empires accelerated their declines, governments have taken steps to protect their interests against the people.

In the past, they have imposed curfews, disarmed the population, curtailed civil liberties, and declared national emergencies, usually against some great faceless enemy from abroad who threatens their way of life.

As it turns out, though, our great faceless enemy is not some mythical boogeyman living in a cave, nor some angry brown person who hates us for our freedoms... but the very people within the system who've taken an oath to 'support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.'

Have you hit your breaking point yet?

Keiser Report: Selective Amnesia for Brokers & Murderers (E266)

Keiser Report: Selective Amnesia for Brokers & Murderers (E266)



Follow Max Keiser on Twitter: http://twitter.com/maxkeiser In this episode, Max Keiser and co-host, Stacy Herbert, discuss Irish stoicism and social ostracism, boycotts and ponzis and the banking practices of Chuckie. In the second half of the show Max talks to independent journalist, Lars Schall, about his recently published investigation into insider trading around the 9-11 terrorist attack as well as his pursuit of Germany's elusive gold reserves.

M22 NYPD's Nightly Eviction of Occupy Union Square

M22 NYPD's Nightly Eviction of Occupy Union Square - Occupy TVNY NYC, March 22: Night Four of the Occupation of Union Square. As has become a nightly ritual, NYPD closes the park at midnight with a show of brutal force, barricading off the steps, and in an echo of the eviction of Zucotti Park, use as a rationale a cleansing of the park sanitation workers testify Union Square never normally sees. A cop pushes a young woman down steps. A man is arrested on suspicion of having fallen asleep. Fear and doubt are quite visible in the faces of the police, whose ranks include an counter-terrorist agent and a squadron in riot gear. Changing orders and promises as they go, the police gradually take over the park, pushing the people out as they set the stage for the sanitation workers. The homeless who have long found a haven in the park are driven out along with the protesters.

Twitter sticks together with OWS protesters

Twitter refuses to give out from account
of Jeffrey Rae, a prominent OWS protester
charged with disorderly conduct
Twitter sticks together with OWS protesters - Russia Today

Twitter Inc. refuses to give out information on Jeffrey Rae, a prominent OWS protester whose on-the-ground Twitter reporting is followed by thousands. Activists under police scrutiny say a political witch hunt has begun on behalf of “the 1 per cent”.

The microblogging service Twitter says it will not comply with the request two weeks ago by the New York District Attorney to hand over data about an Occupy Wall Street protester. Jeffrey Rae was among more than 700 activists arrested during a Brooklyn Bridge march in New York on October 1 last year.
Bloggers now say it is the beginning of authorities’ digging into the social media black hole, as Rae is now part of a chain of similar privacy requests.

And the protesters who believed Twitter was a secure way to communicate during demonstrations may have another thing coming.

Jeff Rae describes himself on Twitter as a “rabble rouser, agitator, organizer, labor activist.” 

On October 1, 2011, Rae received two charges of disorderly conduct and one charge of “Horse/unauthorized Riding/ltd Use Vehicle.” After the arrest he tweeted that he was charged with “failure to obey order, prohibited use of roadway, and blocking traffic.”

That is what the NYPD calls a “disobedient civilian”.

Two weeks ago the New York District Attorney’s sent a subpoena to Twitter, seeking information about the account belonging to Jeffrey Rae.

Rae himself received an email, which included a copy of a subpoena from the DA requesting data from his account.

“You are commanded to appear before the criminal court of the County of New York as a witness in a criminal action prosecuted by the People of the State of New York against Jeffery Rae,” the subpoena reads.

It also says the activist must “produce” in court all tweets that came from his account, @jeffrae, from September 15 to October 31 of last year, "as a witness in a criminal action.”

Legal gray area emerges in social media privacy


Now the OWS protesters are sure authorities want to use social media data as evidence against them to stop the movement against “corporate greed”.

“My tweets were being called to testify against their creator because on October 1 of last year I was one of more than 700 people arrested on the Brooklyn Bridge as part of an Occupy Wall Street action,” says Malcolm Harris, who received a similar subpoena few weeks ago.

It became clear the police are seeking information about activists, including their names, addresses, records of session times, the length of those sessions, which devices they used to access their Twitter account and any IP addresses from which they connected.

However, Twitter has decided to resist. They are possibly attempting to calm their users after an outrage caused by a multibillion deal between the service and a UK-based firm, DataSift, which has bought millions of archive tweets and got free access to personal data.

Twitter’s legal department then informed the DA's office that they would not comply with the request until the motion was resolved, according to Paul Mills, the attorney representing Rae.

Long arm of law on a hunt to grab privacy


Cause for concern, it would seem, is how the United States is allowing law enforcement to question how its citizens engage in legitimate, democratic and constitutionally-allowed demonstrations.

“Dangers of terrorism” has become a usual pretext to interfere into citizens’ privacy, outraging both digital privacy advocates and civil libertarians.

In 2003, citing those “dangers”, a US federal judge granted expanded surveillance powers to the New York police, who had previously faced restrictions in monitoring political groups.

During the US investigation of WikiLeaks, requests for data from companies like Google and Twitter have been also made.

Twitter and Facebook are constantly and thoroughly monitored. The recent notorious case of British tourists who were imprisoned and deported from the US for Twitter jokes about digging up the body of famed Hollywood starlet Marilyn Monroe, might seem funny to some.

But the prison terms in the UK for people accused of rioting in London last August based on their Facebook posts remind us of the danger approaching.

US activists rage at the authorities not only because of privacy harassment. As the US is the first nation to criticize other countries for what it calls freedom oppression, it acts tougher and tougher at home.
"It's interesting that in places like Egypt our leaders applaud people for using Twitter and social media for their movements. Here, I'm being subpoenaed for using social media," Jeffrey Rae says.

Friday, March 23, 2012

Exclusive: OWS Activist Cecily McMillan Describes Seizure, Bodily Injuries in Arrest by NYPD

Exclusive: OWS Activist Cecily McMillan Describes Seizure, Bodily Injuries in Arrest by NYPD - DemocracyNow



democracynow.org - Occupy Wall Street activist Cecily McMillan suffered a seizure when New York City police officers pulled her from the crowd and arrested her as hundreds attempted to re-occupy Zuccotti Park on Saturday, to mark sixth months since the launch of the movement. In her first television interview since her arrest, McMillan says she has decided to speak out because of an outpouring of public support. "I have received so many emails, Twitter messages and phone calls. People are just horrified about what happened to me." McMillan has a black eye and her body is covered in bruises, at least one in the shape of a handprint. She says she was not allowed to contact an attorney while she was taken to the hospital and transferred to a jail cell along with some of the 72 other detained protesters. Facing charges of police assault and obstructing governmental administration, she was released Monday after a judge denied a request that her bail be set at $20,000. McMillan is northeast regional organizer for Young Democratic Socialists of America, and a graduate student at the New School for Social Research. We're also joined by Meghan Maurus, McMillan's attorney and mass defense coordinator at the New York City chapter of the National Lawyers Guild.

World Bank Threatens Mali

World Bank Threatens Mali - Mathaba.net

The African masses know the democracy game better
than most university educated westerners,
our African Affairs Editor reports.

The World Bank, an arm of the globalist banker elite run out of the United States, has threatened the interim military government of Mali in a statement released on the World Bank web site.

The statement condemns the patriotic military force of Mali for taking over from the inept government which represented foreign banker interests and not those of the citizens of Mali.

It calls for the restoration of "constitutional government in order to preserve the development gains of Mali and its people."

Mali, located in central west Africa, is one of the poorest states in Africa, after following western prescriptions designed to benefit foreign interests.

On the other hand, Libya in central north Africa was the wealthiest state of Africa being one of only a small handful in the world to reject World Bank loans and prescriptions as well as not to have a private central bank.

For most of last year western military forces overthrew the Libyan democracy and installed a puppet military regime after massacring an estimated hundred thousand citizens and causing around one million to flee Libya for their lives.

This state of affairs is not lost on Africans who are demanding their governments take action in the defense of their best interests or step aside to allow other forms of government.

While military governments send shivers down the spines of white academics and intellectuals, in Africa they are often seen as agents of positive change, bringing about required corrections to corruption, nepotism, incompetence or other short falls of unaccountable governments.

What matters most to African citizens is not the theories of their former white colonial masters about multi party elections which were slated for next month in Mali, but a real say in the running of their affairs and the ownership of their national resources and wealth.

To Africans, democracy means more than the casting of a ballot paper into a box once every few years, to legitimise the parties and candidates put in front of them by the foreign mining companies and bankers of the former colonial powers which are responsible for the world's wealthiest continent having the world's poorest population.

It is in this environment that any drastic action taken that may bring about change is welcomed with rods and prayers that the interim authorities will clean up the mess away from party politics and then hand over power to the people rather than to representatives of their exploiters once again.

Many soldiers in Africa have studied the theory of consensus direct participatory democracy advocated in The Green Book, the author of which is held as a popular hero throughout the continent.

Mali was one of the many African states to benefit in recent years from the development aid and investment from the Libyan Jamahiriya, including plans for a new African Central Bank, African Monetary Fund and African Investment bank with a starting capital of $42 billon.

This project, an idea of Muammar Qaddafi, author of The Green Book, would have removed the hand of the World Bank and its International Monetary Fund from Africa once and for all.

The African economic project which was slated to be launched in September 2011 was prevented by the invasion of Libya and the confiscation by the U.S. of Libya's contribution to the starting fund.

Libya being Africa's most wealthy state was contributing the bulk of the start up fund, $32 billion, with the remaining $10 billion put in by the other 52 African states. Thus the U.S. theft of the money, not mentioned in western media, has ensured Africa's continued slavery to the white western banker elite which has dominated every western regime for the past hundreds of years.

It is in this context that the situation in Mali and throughout Africa's poorest land locked and desert regions of the Sahel - Sahara needs to be seen.

See the linked article below on how to stay tuned to Mathaba Africa news. #

The French Connection: Are we watching Gladio-style electioneering by terror?

© Thierry Pons/Maxppp/Zuma Press/MCT
The French Connection: Are we watching Gladio-style electioneering by terror? by Richard Cottrell

The following are important facts that may help you understand the background to the recent shocking events in South Western France.

Three servicemen have died and in another attack on a Jewish school, a teacher, two of his own children and a third child were tragically gunned down by a masked man riding a motor scooter.

Important fact number one: the first round of the French presidential election is scheduled for April 22nd. A final encounter between the two front runners is scheduled for May 6th, should no clear winner emerge from the first round.

And number two: the incumbent Nicholas Sarkozy is fighting for his political life. He has trailed his socialist opponent Francoise Holland for months now. He has not led in the polls against any socialist contender since November 2009.

To sum up, Sarkozy is one of the consistently least popular presidents in the history of the Fifth Republic. He looked every inch the loser engaged in a race to the bottom. His populist lunges at the over-bearing EU, playing the anti-Turkish card over the Armenian genocide issue, barely registered more than a temporary flicker on the political Geiger counter.

It is unlikely that an outright victor will emerge from the first round. This requires an absolute margin over all candidates. Eight are on the starting block for April 22nd. Sarkozy and Hollande are virtually neck and neck at 27-28% respectively (average of polls conducted March 15 - 19).

Sarkozy's nightmare is a knock-out blow delivered in the first round. Looking at the polls before the recent events in and around Toulouse, this appeared at least a possibility.

To avoid being tossed from the Élysée Palace in such a humiliating fashion, Sarkozy must sap votes from Hollande and Marin le Pen, the fragrant leader of the National Front (running third, with an average but solid rating of 16%) and the charismatic independent Francois Bayrou (average 11%), then hope to wheel around and defeat Hollande in the final duel on May 6th.

If Sarkozy were to trail Hollande, albeit even slightly, in the first round, this would count as a defeat in the eyes of French voters. It would then be left to Hollande to administer the coup de grace.

The net effect of the attacks will likely be as follows:

The Jewish vote will solidify behind Sarkozy (who incidentally has Jewish blood on his mother's side).

He will rally that significant portion of the French electorate which is resolutely opposed to further Muslim immigration, which in France comes largely from former colonies such as Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia.

[Editor's note: he has already been playing to this segment of the French electorate by promoting the idea of closed borders. This latest tragedy just builds upon that previous move.]

Mlle le Pen will undoubtedly see some of her core strength seep towards the president and Bayrou's support base will weaken significantly.

Read complete report..

Related:

Thursday, March 22, 2012

A Little Unfinished Business

A Little Unfinished Business by Sherwood Ross

If President Bush invaded Afghanistan and Iraq based on lies and deception, please explain why the U.S. is not responsible for repairing the horrific damage inflicted on those two countries and for paying reparations. By some estimates more than 1 million Iraqis have been killed, more than a million have been wounded, more than a million have lost their homes, two million have fled the country, and millions are without adequate electricity and other services essential for civilized life

Meanwhile, President Obama’s ongoing war in Afghanistan is claiming some 4,000 civilian lives a year and forcing hundreds of thousands of Afghan residents out of their homes. And what of those citizens of both nations who have lost their jobs, starved to death, been stricken by diseases which previously did not exist, such as cholera, and doused with radioactive poisons from uranium-tipped shells and have been unable to obtain medical care as doctors and health technicians fled in the face of the invasion or because hospitals, (yes, hospitals) were destroyed in the fighting or commandeered by the Pentagon?

Is the U.S. going to pay indemnity for the stillborn or grotesquely deformed infants in Iraq as a result of its use of illegal, irradiated ordnance? Is it going to pay for the war-induced outbreaks of cholera across Iraq that have claimed in one recent year more lives (in the thousands) than in all of Asia from that preventable disease?

In Afghanistan, the U.S. air raids flattened whole commercial and residential blocks and spread unexploded cluster bombs having the power to kill over wide areas. As Howard Zinn, who rightly termed the bombings a crime against humanity, wrote in “The Progressive” magazine, “The city of Kandahar, attacked for seventeen straight days, was reported to be a ghost town, with more than half of its 500,000 people fleeing the bombs. The city’s electrical grid had been knocked out. The city was deprived of water, since the electrical pumps could not operate…” Who’s going to pick up the bill for that?

Are the American people, who just at this moment are a little short of cash, going to pay back the Iraqis for the income they lost when the U.S.-made war ravaged their infrastructure and their economy? As the Los Angeles “Times” reported Feb. 15, 2009, “Unemployment and under-employment have plagued Iraq since the U.S. invasion of March 2003, which toppled Saddam Hussein’s dictatorship but also led to sectarian warfare and chaos that closed most businesses and uprooted millions of Iraqis.” That’s six years of terrible joblessness and commensurate lost wages to workers. To worsen their plight, Chomsky cited a labor leader who reported “the occupying forces broke into union offices, arrested leaders…(and handed) over concessions to bitterly anti-union U.S. businesses.”

As Nobel Prize economist Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes write in their book “The Three Trillion Dollar War,” (Norton), “For most Iraqis daily life has become unbearable—to the point that those who can afford to leave their country have done so. By Sept., 2007, a stunning 4.6 million people—one of every seven Iraqis—had been uprooted from their homes.” Not surprisingly, the writers add, “The majority of Iraqi children are not attending school.”

The authors describe how the U.S. attack degraded Iraq to the point where that public is worse off now than under dictator Saddam Hussein: “Life is actually worse for the Iraqi people now. The country’s roads, schools, hospitals, homes, and museums have been destroyed and its citizens have less access to electricity and water than before the war.”

My question: Which of our presidential candidates, particularly those who dwell on their Christian background and virtues, are—-given the foregoing-cited crimes—going to advocate Americans repay the aggrieved and robbed citizens of Afghanistan and Iraq for all that they have destroyed?

Sherwood Ross is a Miami-based public relations consultant. Reach him at sherwoodross10@gmail.com

Huge 'UFO Fragment' Discovered in Siberia

Huge 'UFO Fragment' Discovered in Siberia - Life's Little Mysteries
© Russia Today
This large metal object was discovered in a Siberian forest.
A metal object the size of a Volkswagen Beetle has been discovered near a remote village in Siberia. Local residents presumed it recently fell to Earth from space, but officials from Russia's space agency examined the object and said it "is not related to space technology."

Locals discovered the roughly 200-kilogram (440 pounds) object, which is cylindrical and capped on one end by a ridged dome, March 18 in the forest near the village of Otradnesnky. They attached the "UFO fragment" (as media outlets have called it) to a trailer and dragged it through the snow to their village. They then alerted Moscow authorities, according to a report in Britain's The Telegraph, and the object was confiscated for inspection.

Following the initial examination, an official for Roscosmos, the Russian space agency, reportedly said: "The object found is not related to space technology. A final conclusion can be made after a detailed study of the object by experts."

Part of the fragment is made of titanium, according to district officials. Additional tests showed it was not radioactive.

Nick Johnson, head of NASA's orbital debris office, said there isn't sufficient information about the object for him to make a full assessment, but it doesn't appear to be part of a spacecraft.

"The object almost certainly is not related to a spacecraft," Johnson told Life's Little Mysteries. "It also does not look like part of a launch vehicle which has fallen from orbit. However, we cannot be definitive in our judgment without better photos and other data. For example, the date the object fell is vitally important, but I did not see reference to it."

It is also unclear whether the object really did fall from space or got lost in the woods by some other route.

The Video YouTube Deleted in Two Minutes

Untitled by Chris Busby


Untitled from Chris Busby on Vimeo.


Related Intel:  

Source 
Intel Disclosure, March 21, 2012

'Al Qaeda' Killer's Extensive Links To French Authorities

'Al Qaeda' Killer's Extensive Links To French Authorities by Brit Dee

The man accused of killing seven people during recent gun attacks in Toulouse has been killed, following a 32-hour standoff with police -- as more information has come to light about his extensive links to the French authorities.

Mohammed Merah, a self-proclaimed Al Qaeda operative, was reportedly found dead on the ground after being shot in the head and falling from his apartment window, following a five-minute gun battle when police stormed the building.

Whilst French authorities claimed to want to end the standoff peacefully and take Merah alive, the siege's fatal finale conveniently removes from the picture a suspect who appears to have had a great deal of contact with both the French intelligence services and the police -- and even with the US military.

French interior minister Claude Guéant yesterday revealed that Merah had been on the radar of the DCRI -- France's domestic intelligence agency -- "for years".

It has since transpired that Merah was questioned by the intelligence service as recently as November 2011, after being summoned to explain trips he had made to Afghanistan and Pakistan. Astonishingly, Merah was reportedly granted freedom to leave

That Merah's explanation satisfied the intelligence service is inexplicable, considering their familiarity with his track record of suspicious activity. Merah had reportedly made two trips to the Afghanistan-Pakistan region, and whilst his attorney Christian Etelin has denied such rumors, some have claimed he even spent time in a Kandahar jail before escaping during a Taliban breakoutWhilst Merah's reported time in an Afghan jail has yet to be established, other sources, including top French prosecutor Francois Mollins, have stated that he was arrested by Afghan police at a checkpoint and handed over to the US military, before being flown back to France. US military officials have claimed not to have any information regarding Merah's alleged detention in Afghanistan.

Today saw further revelations come to light about the French authorities' knowledge of Merah's violent tendencies. A report in French newspaper Le Télégramme details how the mother of a 15-year-old-boy claims she twice filed complaints with the police, after Merah showed her son violent Jihadist videos and extremist literature at his Toulouse apartment. The woman, identified by the pseudonym Aisha, said that:
'I am appalled. It took all these people [to be] killed for Mohammed Merah [to be] finally stopped,' she said. 'The police knew all about the danger of this individual and his radicalism'.
Le Télégramme also reports how Merah allegedly went into the street outside the woman's house wearing military fatigues, brandishing a sword, and shouting "I'm with Al-Qaida".

Mohammed Merah's older brother, Abdelkader, was apparently also well known to the authorities. He was arrested on suspicion of belonging to the Knights of Pride -- an extremist group against the banning of the burka in France. It was Mohammed's brother who allegedly sent an unsecured email to one of his brother's victims, arranging to view a motorbike -- an appointment at which the paratrooper was murdered. Merah was tracked down after the IP address and location were traced from the email.

The French authorities' excuses for their inability to prevent Merah's killings are highly questionable. As Merah very much fits the profile of a classic intelligence asset -- young, disaffected, and with a history of petty criminality -- serious questions should be asked about whether he really just "slipped through the net", or if in reality the intelligence services deliberately failed to prevent the attack, or even actively provocateured it.

In this regard it is interesting to note that Nikolas Sarkozy, previously trailing in the polls in a French election year, is now the favorite to win the first round of the presidential election next month. Sarkozy has promised a shocked French nation that he will crack down on Islamic extremism should he be re-elected, as well as stating that he will introduce stricter monitoring of the Internet, and make it a crime to visit unspecified "hate" websites. 

This article first appeared at Resistance Radio

Brit Dee runs an independent online radio station called Resistance Radio, which broadcasts daily news, views and analysis challenging the lies of our corrupt political and financial leaders, and the controlled corporate media, at http://www.resistradio.com

Wednesday, March 21, 2012

The ex-FBI informant with a change of heart: 'There is no real hunt. It's fixed'

© The Washington Post
Craig Monteilh: 'It is all about entrapment.'
The ex-FBI informant with a change of heart: 'There is no real hunt. It's fixed' by Paul Harris

Craig Monteilh describes how he pretended to be a radical Muslim in order to root out potential threats, shining a light on some of the bureau's more ethically murky practices.

 Craig Monteilh says he did not balk when his FBI handlers gave him the OK to have sex with the Muslim women his undercover operation was targeting. Nor, at the time, did he shy away from recording their pillow talk.

"They said, if it would enhance the intelligence, go ahead and have sex. So I did," Monteilh told the Guardian as he described his year as a confidential FBI informant sent on a secret mission to infiltrate southern Californian mosques.

It is an astonishing admission that goes that goes to the heart of the intelligence surveillance of Muslim communities in America in the years after 9/11. While police and FBI leaders have insisted they are acting to defend America from a terrorist attack, civil liberties groups have insisted they have repeatedly gone too far and treated an entire religious group as suspicious.

Monteilh was involved in one of the most controversial tactics: the use of "confidential informants" in so-called entrapment cases. This is when suspects carry out or plot fake terrorist "attacks" at the request or under the close supervision of an FBI undercover operation using secret informants. Often those informants have serious criminal records or are supplied with a financial motivation to net suspects.

In the case of the Newburgh Four - where four men were convicted for a fake terror attack on Jewish targets in the Bronx - a confidential informant offered $250,000, a free holiday and a car to one suspect for help with the attack.

In the case of the Fort Dix Five, which involved a fake plan to attack a New Jersey military base, one informant's criminal past included attempted murder, while another admitted in court at least two of the suspects later jailed for life had not known of any plot.

Such actions have led Muslim civil rights groups to wonder if their communities are being unfairly targeted in a spying game that is rigged against them. Monteilh says that is exactly what happens. "The way the FBI conducts their operations, It is all about entrapment ... I know the game, I know the dynamics of it. It's such a joke, a real joke. There is no real hunt. It's fixed," he said.

But Monteilh has regrets now about his involvement in a scheme called Operation Flex. Sitting in the kitchen of his modest home in Irvine, near Los Angeles, Monteilh said the FBI should publicly apologise for his fruitless quest to root out Islamic radicals in Orange County, though he does not hold out much hope that will happen. "They don't have the humility to admit a mistake," he said.

Monteilh's story sounds like something out of a pulp thriller. Under the supervision of two FBI agents the muscle-bound fitness instructor created a fictitious French-Syrian altar ego, called Farouk Aziz. In this disguise in 2006 Monteilh started hanging around mosques in Orange County - the long stretch of suburbia south of LA - and pretended to convert to Islam.

He was tasked with befriending Muslims and blanket recording their conversations. All this information was then fed back to the FBI who told Monteilh to act like a radical himself to lure out Islamist sympathizers.

Yet, far from succeeding, Monteilh eventually so unnerved Orange County's Muslim community that that they got a restraining order against him. In an ironic twist, they also reported Monteilh to the FBI: unaware he was in fact working undercover for the agency.

Monteilh does not look like a spy. He is massively well built, but soft-spoken and friendly. He is 49 but looks younger. He lives in a small rented home in Irvine that blends into the suburban sprawl of southern California. Yet Monteilh knows the spying game intimately well.

By his own account Monteilh got into undercover work after meeting a group of off-duty cops working out in a gym. Monteilh told them he had spent time in prison in Chino, serving time for passing fraudulent checks.

It is a criminal past he explains by saying he was traumatised by a nasty divorce. "It was a bad time in my life," he said. He and the cops got to talking about the criminals Monteilh had met while in Chino. The information was so useful that Monteilh says he began to work on undercover drug and organised crime cases.

Eventually he asked to work on counter-terrorism and was passed on to two FBI handlers, called Kevin Armstrong and Paul Allen. These two agents had a mission and an alias ready-made for him.

Posing as Farouk Aziz he would infiltrate local mosques and Islamic groups around Orange County. "Paul Allen said: 'Craig, you are going to be our computer worm. Our guy that gives us the real pulse of the Muslim community in America'," Monteilh said.

The operation began simply enough. Monteilh started hanging out at mosques, posing as Aziz, and explaining he wanted to learn more about religion. In July, 2006, at the Islamic Center of Irvine, he converted to Islam.

Monteilh also began attending other mosques, including the Orange County Islamic Foundation. Monteilh began circulating endlessly from mosque to mosque, spending long days in prayer or reading books or just hanging out in order to get as many people as possible to talk to him.

"Slowly I began to wear the robes, the hat, the scarf and they saw me slowly transform and growing a beard. At that point, about three or four months later, [my FBI handlers] said: 'OK, now start to ask questions'."

Those questions were aimed at rooting out radicals. Monteilh would talk of his curiosity over the concepts of jihad and what Muslims should do about injustices in the world, especially where it pertained to American foreign policy.

He talked of access to weapons, a possible desire to be a martyr and inquired after like-minded souls. It was all aimed at trapping people in condemning statements. "The skill is that I am going to get you to say something. I am cornering you to say "jihad"," he said.

Of course, the chats were recorded.

In scenes out of a James Bond movie, Monteilh said he sometimes wore a secret video recorder sewn into his shirt. At other times he activated an audio recorder on his key rings.

Monteilh left his keys in offices and rooms in the mosques that he attended in the hope of recording conversations that took place when he was not here. He did it so often that he earned a reputation with other worshippers for being careless with his keys. The recordings were passed back to his FBI handlers at least once a week.

He also met with them every two months at a hotel room in nearby Anaheim for a more intense debriefing. Monteilh says he was grilled on specific individuals and asked to view charts showing networks of relationships among Orange County's Muslim population.

He said the FBI had two basic aims. Firstly, they aimed to uncover potential militants. Secondly, they could also use any information Monteilh discovered - like an affair or someone being gay - to turn targeted people into becoming FBI informants themselves.

None of it seemed to unnerve his FBI bosses, not even when he carried out a suggestion to begin seducing Muslim women and recording them.

At one hotel meeting, agent Kevin Armstrong explained the FBI attitude towards the immense breadth of Operation Flex - and any concerns over civil rights - by saying simply: "Kevin is God."

Monteilh's own attitude evolved into something very similar. "I was untouchable. I am a felon, I am on probation and the police cannot arrest me. How empowering is that? It is very empowering. You began to have a certain arrogance about it. It is almost taunting. They told me: 'You are an untouchable'," he said.

But it was not always easy. "I started at 4am. I ended at 9.30pm. Really, it was a lot of work ... Farouk took over. Craig did not exist," he said. But it was also well paid: at the peak of Operation Flex, Monteilh was earning more than $11,000 a month.

But he was wrong about being untouchable.

Far from uncovering radical terror networks, Monteilh ended up traumatising the community he was sent into. Instead of embracing calls for jihad or his questions about suicide bombers or his claims to have access to weapons, Monteilh was instead reported to the FBI as a potentially dangerous extremist.

A restraining order was also taken out against him in June 2007, asking him to stay away from the Islamic Center of Irvine. Operation Flex was a bust and Monteilh had to kill off his life as Farouk Aziz.

But the story did not end there. In circumstances that remain murky Monteilh then sued the FBI over his treatment, claiming that they abandoned him once the operation was over.

He also ended up in jail after Irvine police prosecuted him for defrauding two women, including a former girlfriend, as part of an illegal trade in human growth hormone at fitness clubs. (Monteilh claims those actions were carried out as part of another secret string operation for which he was forced to carry the can.)

What is not in doubt is that Monteilh's identity later became public. In 2009 the FBI brought a case against Ahmad Niazi, an Afghan immigrant in Orange County.

The evidence included secret recordings and even calling Osama bin Laden "an angel". That was Monteilh's work and he outed himself to the press to the shock of the very Muslims he had been spying on who now realised that Farouk Aziz - the radical they had reported to the FBI two years earlier - had in fact been an undercover FBI operative.

Now Monteilh says he set Niazi up and the FBI was trying to blackmail the Afghani into being an informant. "I built the whole relationship with Niazi. Through my coercion we talked about jihad a lot," he said. The FBI's charges against Niazi were indeed later dropped.

Now Monteilh has joined an American Civil Liberties Union lawsuit against the FBI. Amazingly, after first befriending Muslim leaders in Orange County as Farouk Aziz, then betraying them as Craig Monteilh, he has now joined forces with them again to campaign for their civil liberties.

That has now put Monteilh's testimony about his year undercover is at the heart of a fresh legal effort to prove that the FBI operation in Orange County unfairly targeted a vulnerable Muslim community, trampling on civil rights in the name of national security.

The FBI did not respond to a request from the Guardian for comment.

It is not the first time Monteilh has shifted his stance. In the ACLU case Monteilh is now posing as the sorrowful informant who saw the error of his ways.

But in previous court papers filed against the Irvine Police and the FBI, Monteilh's lawyers portrayed him as the loyal intelligence asset who did sterling work tackling the forces of Islamic radicalism and was let down by his superiors.

In those papers Monteilh complained that FBI agents did not act speedily enough on a tip he gave them about a possible sighting of bomb-making materials. Now Monteilh says that tip was not credible.

Either way it does add up to a story that shifts with the telling. But that fact alone goes to the heart of the FBI's use of such confidential informants in investigating Muslim communities.

FBI operatives with profiles similar to Monteilh's - of a lengthy criminal record, desire for cash and a flexibility with the truth - have led to high profile cases of alleged entrapment that have shocked civil rights groups across America.

In most cases the informants have won their prosecutions and simply disappeared. Monteilh is the only one speaking out. But whatever the reality of his year undercover, Monteilh is almost certainly right about one impact of Operation Flex and the exposure of his undercover activities: "Because of this the Muslim community will never trust the FBI again."

Sarkozy's Backers To Use Toulouse Attacks To Steal French Election

Sarkozy speaking in Toulouse, March
19th 2012. A 'strong leader in a crisis'.
But who is behind the crisis?
Sarkozy's Backers To Use Toulouse Attacks To Steal French Election by Joe Quinn

 French President Sarkozy's 2012 re-election bid has been faltering almost since he was 'elected' in 2007. Long viewed by a majority of the French public as a latter-day Napoleon wannabe, some were perplexed as to how he won the 2007 presidential race, given that one year before the election, opinion polls placed him a definite second, and between then and the election he did nothing to justify his alleged increase in popularity, with his 'Bling Bling' approach to electioneering turning the stomachs of many French people. In addition, within a few months of his 'victory' in May 2007, Sarkozy's popularity had plummeted to around 30% as people reacted to his austere economic reforms, on which he had openly campaigned, mind you. How to explain such a sudden turnaround so soon after his victory? It was only on election day that, somehow, the diminutive son of a Hungarian immigrant and his 'princes of Paris' were gifted 5 years in the Elysee palace.

Rigged Elections?

Today it's common knowledge (or it should be) that election results, even in the world's 'greatest democracies', can be easily 'flipped' by way of electronic voting machines. That such machines were introduced by Sarkozy himself (as Minister of the Interior) in 2004, for around 4% of the French electorate raised a few eyebrows, and offered a plausible explanation for Sarkozy's unexpected victory, especially since the official tally was 53.06% for Sarko and 46.94% for Royal, i.e. within the 4% 'flip' margin. It also struck me as rather strange that opinion and exit polls were so accurate (some months in advance of the election) in their prediction that Sarkozy would win 53% and Royal 47%.

Since 2007, 'Sarko the American' has evoked little more than disgust from the majority of the French public. In 2007, when it became clear that he planned to make good on his election promises to slowly destroy France's social welfare system while giving tax breaks to corporations and the rich, millions of public sector workers took to the streets in protest. Millions of public and private sector workers demonstrated again throughout September and October 2010 against the raising of the retirement age from 60 to 62. On both occasions, Sarkozy arrogantly broke with tradition (and democratic principles) by dismissing the protests as insignificant and pushed ahead with his elitist policies. In addition, Sarkozy has been implicated in several financial and criminal scandals. On a personal level, the French president's conceitedness, frequent inability to control his anger and lack of humility are seen as unfitting for an alleged statesman, and have repeatedly provoked the disdain of the majority of French citizens. Consequently, his chances of legitimate reelection in May this year lie somewhere between slim and non-existent.

Even someone like Sarkozy is not impervious to awareness of his extremely low approval rating, and a few weeks ago he appeared to be predicting his defeat ("I'd rather be a Carmelite monk than carry on in politics if I lose"). While Sarko is unlikely to end up in a monastery, he undoubtedly would love to disappear off the radar if he is booted out of the Elysee in May. You see, as President Sarkozy, he is immune from prosecution. As plain old Sarko, he is not, and there are many people (Jacques Chirac and Dominique de Villepin to name but two) who would be only too happy to facilitate investigations into his extremely dubious business and political deals dating back over 20 years. That is in fact precisely what Manuel Valls, the campaign director for Socialist Party candidate Francois Hollande has stated - that Sarkozy is terrified of losing the election because he would lose his immunity.

Read more.. 

Related:  

NYPD Tramples Injured Protester at Union Square - #OWSUnionSquare #policebrutality #M20

NYPD Tramples Injured Protester at Union Square - #OWSUnionSquare #policebrutality #M20 - 12160.info

Occupiers in Union Square Stormed in Late Night Raid

Occupiers in Union Square Stormed in Late Night Raid - OccupyWallSt.org

3/21: Union Square's occupation, active since the brutal NYPD police raid on Liberty Square on 3/17, is currently under threat of eviction. People are needed NOW to converge on the park and hold our public commons! Follow @OWSUnionSquare.

Live updates

  • 6:07 AM: Park officially re-opened.
  • 5:20 AM: via Twitter: ¨The NYPD have officially fled the scene of their crime.¨ Tonight, at least four people were arrested, books needlessly destroyed, and one woman knocked unconscious by police brutality -- all for the ¨crime¨ of laying down in a public park.
  • 4:37 AM: Most police appear to be leaving in advance of the arrival of rush hour traffic when public wakes up. Occupiers return to park, laying down again. Chanting ¨goodbye!¨ at NYPD.
  • 4:21 AM: Mainstream media on the scene. The District Attorney has also arrived. Union Square still blocked off. Police still moving Occupiers incrementally to allow sanitation to ¨clean¨ the park. Occupiers being slowly pushed out of the park. Occupier: ¨I really thought the police were going to be chill tonight about this. They were calm and rational earlier. Then they bumrush us, throw girl with head trauma around....¨
  • 4:19 AM: Occupier: ¨The rest of the country is going to see this in the morning!¨ Chant: ¨Oppress us, we multiply!¨
  • 4:10 AM: Heard on livestream: ¨Wake up [NYPD]; six months of beatings and we´re still here! We´re not going anywhere!¨
  • 4:07 AM: Chanting: ¨You have no authority¨ at NYPD; ¨1 we are the people 2 we are united, 3 this occupation is not leaving!¨ Police officer seen with hand on pistol. Other police steal Occupier´s books and throw them away.
  • 4:04 AM: EMT and medics approach woman knocked unconscious by police. Cops aggressively storm them, brutally rush into crowd, trample people, causing panic. People screaming. Peaceful protesters are being ATTACKED because they tried to give professional medical attention for head trauma! Injured woman was stepped on.
  • 3:56 AM: Police rush the crowd, shoving and attacking people. Livestream briefly down, back up now. At least one person reported badly injured, now unconscious, after being grabbed and thrown to the ground by cops. Medics on the scene.
  • 3:48 AM: Police surround protesters on the ground, move in to make arrests.
  • 3:43 AM: Sanitation trucks have arrived, threatening to take possession of any unintended property. Police again threaten anyone who is sitting or laying down. OWSers chant: ¨Homeslessness is not a crime!¨ and ¨Get your hand off your gun!¨ at police who motioned to draw a weapon.
  • 3:22 AM: Police warn anyone else laying down will be arrested. Sitting down is illegal. Mic check: ¨Let´s move the People´s Library somewhere safer¨
  • 3:14 AM: Line of police, some in riot gear, confront protesters singing Solidarity Forever. According to @OccuyWallStNYC: ¨"So, the park will be open at 6am and they can all go back in?" asks one NYPD captain. "Yup" says the other.¨
  • 3:01 AM:: Police just made an arrest. Threatening other Occupiers for sitting on the sidewalk.
  • 3:00 AM: Police still harassing people in the Square. Livestream is still up. Protesters chanting "we get confused when the law changes everyday.¨ Presence of counter-terrorism officials confirmed, won´t give name.
  • 2:47 AM: Occupiers peacefully singing and laying down. Remember, donuts.
  • 2:30 AM: Occupiers asking NYPD: ¨What are your demands? How long will you be occupying?¨ Large cuddle pile on the south side of the park.
  • 2:09 AM: We will not be divided, we will not be provoked. Chants of "BAD COP? NO DONUT", and other assorted silliness. Most NYPD officers unable to hold composure and are smirking.
  • 2:02 AM: Donut has been put at the end of a string, string has been tied to the end of a stick. Occupier is using stick to dangle donut over barricades. There are chants of "This is a peaceful donut". Occupiers keeping the mood one of joy and celebration.
  • 1:59 AM: Pizza has arrived, occupiers simply sleeping on sidewalk.
  • 1:24 AM: NYPD officers look bored. They are shown shifting around, fidgeting, etc.
  • 1:22 AM: Situation is somewhat calm, standoff in park. Need more people to park.
  • 1:16 AM: Sanitation workers "cleaning" the park. These are some of the most well-defended sanitation workers in history.
  • 1:03 AM: Sanitation workers have arrived, NYPD appears to have run out of barricades and are bringing in wooden sawhorse style barricades.
  • 12:52 AM: Badge #5647 put her hand in front of a badged press camera, turned around when asked for a badge number.
  • 12:48 AM: NYPD has begun carrying in barricades to barricade off the park.
  • 12:36 AM: Occupiers are holding general assembly just outside park steps.
  • 12:28 AM: Occupiers have once again begun chanting "Who do you serve, who do you protect?" NYPD threatening violence in the form of saying "I don't want nobody to get hurt."
  • 12:25 AM: First arrest has been made. Officers trying to physically force people further away from their public property.
  • 12:22 AM: Officer on megaphone announcing to leave the park. Need more people to park, wake up your friends, wake up your family.
  • 12:13 AM: Lone occupier left sitting on a crate inside park, surrounded by line of riot NYPD. Who do you call when the police are rioting? Tim reports NYPD Conterterrorism arriving. Ambulance arriving for pregnant woman.
  • 12:11 AM: 20 more NYPD have arrived in riot gear from behind the park. Occupiers shouting "remember your oath" at NYPD.
  • 12:10 AM: NYPD repeating false claim that the public park is "closed". Estimates are 70 NYPD officers.
  • 12:05 AM: NYPD has shut down the Union Square subway station. NYPD claims occupiers can stay on sidewalk.
  • 12:04 AM: Occupiers chanting "Who do you serve? Who do you protect?"

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

Liar, liar - the Middle East is on fire.

Liar, liar - the Middle East is on fire. - thestrugglevideo

FBI Linked to Yet Another Domestic Terrorism Plot

© Tracy A. Woodward / The Washington Post
FBI Linked to Yet Another Domestic Terrorism Plot - American Free Press

 In its latest effort to panic the American public, the FBI last month fabricated an alleged al Qaeda terror plot against the U.S. Capitol Building. According to reports published by Russian news outlet RT and others, after arresting an intoxicated American-born drug dealer of Moroccan descent, FBI agents drove him to the Capitol and handed him a fake bomb before summarily rearresting him on Feb. 17.

Over the course of a year, 29-year-old Amine El Khalifi, who was clearly mentally ill and often high on cocaine and other drugs, was persuaded by an FBI informant to agree to attack the U.S. Capitol. Because El Khalifi didn't have a gun, a bomb or a car, the FBI informant graciously offered to provide him all three - and thus El Khalifi was driven to the U.S. Capitol building by the FBI, handed a gun and a bomb, and then arrested as an "al Qaeda operative."

Khalifi was best known for his years of selling drugs and strutting through D.C. nightclubs in designer suits, living a playboy lifestyle. But two years ago, while dating a Muslim woman of Bulgarian and Turkish descent, El Khalifi embraced Islam and became religious, friends said. After the relationship ended, the girlfriend, obviously disgruntled, contacted the FBI and suggested her ex-boyfriend might be a good target for a frame-up.

When El Khalifi had a dispute with his landlord, the landlord called the police. This allowed the FBI to enter El Khalifi's apartment, where they then found some "Islamic literature."

The FBI, anxious to fabricate a terror plot, met El Khalifi and determined that his mind had been fried from a decade of cocaine abuse, and that he was likely suffering from a serious mental illness. Realizing that such a mentally vulnerable person would be an easy dupe, the FBI then cultivated him as a potential "terrorist" patsy, what the FBI calls a "controlled prevention."

As one FBI official put it: "In situations like this - a controlled prevention - the person is predisposed to act and the FBI will give him enough rope to hang himself. Courts have upheld this kind of action time after time."

Under U.S. law, the federal government can entrap any person they believe to be "dangerous" - and most federal cases are based on such entrapments, because they are easier to prosecute than actual criminal acts.

"It was another 'sting' operation with a mentally deficient guy," former CIA counterterrorism chief Vincent Cannistraro told the online news agency Huffington Post. "He was led on by an FBI asset."

These types of arrests are being used by the government to delude the American public and perpetuate a climate of fear that has allowed the government to seize extraordinary powers and has provided cover for the arrests of domestic political opponents as well.
 
Related:  

Unknown Tech Company Fighting Back Against FBI's National Security Letter Gag Order

Kony island: Inside the weird world of Jason Russell

Kony island: Inside the weird world of Jason Russell - Herald Sun

KONY 2012 director Jason Russell describes himself as a radical, rebel soul and dream evangelist.

"If Oprah, Steven Spielberg and Bono had a baby, I would be that baby," he told a magazine last year.

Now he can add another attribute to the list, one that Oprah, Spielberg and Bono are unlikely to approve of: man who runs through the street naked ranting about the devil.

Russell, the co-founder of controversial charity Invisible Children, was taken to a psychiatric ward in San Diego, California, on Thursday after suffering a meltdown in public. He is to be released later today.

TMZ released video footage of Russell hitting the pavement with his fists, swearing to himself and shouting.

It was claimed that Russell was also caught masturbating in the street."If Oprah, Steven Spielberg and Bono had a baby, I would be that baby," he told a magazine last year.

Now he can add another attribute to the list, one that Oprah, Spielberg and Bono are unlikely to approve of: man who runs through the street naked ranting about the devil.

Russell, the co-founder of controversial charity Invisible Children, was taken to a psychiatric ward in San Diego, California, on Thursday after suffering a meltdown in public. He is to be released later today.

TMZ released video footage of Russell hitting the pavement with his fists, swearing to himself and shouting.

It was claimed that Russell was also caught masturbating in the street.

His wife, Danica, blamed the breakdown on the criticism Kony 2012 has attracted.

She denied that he had been drunk or using drugs.

The CEO of Invisible Children, Ben Keesey, said in a statement: "Jason Russell was unfortunately hospitalised yesterday suffering from exhaustion, dehydration, and malnutrition. He is now receiving medical care and is focused on getting better.

"The past two weeks have taken a severe emotional toll on all of us, Jason especially, and that toll manifested itself in an unfortunate incident yesterday.

"Jason's passion and his work have done so much to help so many, and we are devastated to see him dealing with this personal health issue.

''We will always love and support Jason, and we ask that you give his entire family privacy during this difficult time."

Invisible Children has come under fire for its campaign, which seeks to bring Joseph Kony, the Ugandan leader of the violent Lord's Resistance Army, to justice for crimes against humanity.

Many have criticised the charity for how it spends its money.

In an official account of the $13.7 million it raised in the 2010-11 financial year, $8.8 million was allocated for expenses - including filming costs, transportation and production.

The Prime Minister of Uganda is the latest to pile pressure on the charity.

Amama Mbabazi said Kony 2012 gave a "false impression" and that the warlord at the centre of the controversial charity's film, Joseph Kony, was no longer in Uganda.

"The Kony 2012 campaign fails to make one crucial point clear. Joseph Kony is not in Uganda," he said in video posted on YouTube (scroll down to see video).

He said the Kony 2012 video gave a false impression about the situation in Uganda, adding that his country did not "need a slick video on YouTube ... to take notice" of Joseph Kony's crimes.

Russell, who is described on the Invisible Children website as "our grand storyteller and dreamer", began the Kony campaign after he travelling to Gulu, northern Uganda in 2003 and befriending a local boy, Jacob Acaye.

Jacob was one of the children hiding from Kony's brutal regime, a regime that claimed the life of his brother. Jacob watched him die.

Russell co-founded Invisible Children as a not-for-profit organisation tasked with "advocacy and inspiring America's youth to 'do more than just watch'".

He has said he is attracted to pregnant women and he has a son whose middle name is Danger.

'US $2 billion spy facility, useless'; Gordon Duff

'US $2 billion spy facility, useless'; Gordon Duff - Press TV Global News


The US has constructed an espionage spying facility in Utah that can intercept, monitor and store all electronic communications worldwide including inside the US. Press TV has interviewed Gordon Duff, Senior Editor of Veterans Today in Ohio about the construction of the most advanced espionage and spying facility ever built at a cost of two billion dollars which according to Mr. Duff, is useless and a betrayal.

Another Hidden Bailout: Helping Wall Street Collect Your Rent

© Justin Sullivan/Getty Images
A foreclosure sign sits in front of a
home for sale in Stockton, California.
Another Hidden Bailout: Helping Wall Street Collect Your Rent by Matt Taibbi

Here's yet another form of hidden bailout the federal government doles out to our big banks, without the public having much of a clue.

This is from the WSJ this morning:
Some of the biggest names on Wall Street are lining up to become landlords to cash-strapped Americans by bidding on pools of foreclosed properties being sold by Fannie Mae...

While the current approach of selling homes one-by-one has its own high costs and is sometimes inefficient, selling properties in bulk to large investors could require Fannie Mae to sell at a big discount, leading to larger initial costs.
In con artistry parlance, they call this the "reload." That's when you hit the same mark twice - typically with a second scam designed to "fix" the damage caused by the first scam. Someone robs your house, then comes by the next day and sells you a fancy alarm system, that's the reload.

In this case, banks pumped up the real estate market by creating huge volumes of subprime loans, then dumped a lot of them on, among others, Fannie and Freddie, the ever-ready enthusiastic state customer. Now the loans have crashed in value, yet the GSEs (Government Sponsored Enterprises) are still out there feeding the banks money through two continuous bailouts.

One, they continue to buy mortgages from the big banks (until recently, even from Bank of America, whom the GSEs were already suing for sales of toxic MBS), giving the banks a permanent market for home loans.

And secondly, they conduct these quiet bulk sales of mortgages, in which huge packets of home loans are sold to banks at a "big discount."

By now we've come full circle. Banks create the loans, make money selling them off on the market at high prices, then come back and buy them again when they're low. When the GSEs are in the middle of this transaction, it makes mortgage lending a basically risk-free proposition: Banks get paid for creating home loans and they end up owning valuable property on the cheap, but in between, they offshore the market risk to a government entity and/or to the idiot individual who bought the home mortgage in the first place.

Even better, many of the banks/investors who buy these home loans back from Fannie/Freddie will rent out their properties instead of reselling them, which can vastly increase their revenue streams. From the WSJ:
Economists at Goldman Sachs estimate the annual yield on an investment on rental property nationwide averages about 6.3%, but can exceed 8% in cities that were hit hard during the housing bust, including Las Vegas, Detroit and Tampa. By contrast, mortgage bonds have average yields of just over 3%, and investment-grade corporate bonds are yielding about 3.5%, according the Barclays Capital U.S. Investment-Grade Index.
It gets better:
Warren Buffett, considered a sage investor and chief executive of Berkshire Hathaway Inc., said in an interview with CNBC-TV last month that he would buy up "a couple hundred thousand" single-family homes if he could do so easily, given the high yields on rental investments.
Another potential buyer, according to the article, is John Paulson, the pillaging hedge-fund billionaire who was behind Goldman's notorious "Abacus" deal (in which Goldman allowed Paulson to pack a portfolio full of loser mortgages he was shorting before those same mortgages were dumped on a pair of Euro banks).

So congratulations, America, your quasi-governmental housing entity is about to subcontract out mass-landlording/slumlording jobs to the likes of John Paulson and Warren Buffett, so that they can add to their bottom lines collecting rent payments in the middle of a nationwide housing slump.

As one hedge fund analyst put it to me this morning: "Help inflate the bubble, create a foreclosure crisis, buy homes in bulk, and rent them out to the same average homeowner."

Is this what we had in mind when we created the "ownership society" - helping billionaires collect your rent?