Friday, June 13, 2015 - [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ National Whistleblower Center ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Friday, June 13, 2015 - [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ National Whistleblower Center ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ Disseminate Widely ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Monday, August 11, 2014 - [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ Project - N.N.O.M.Y ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Monday, August 11, 2014 - [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ Project - N.N.O.M.Y ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ The National Network Opposing The Militarization of Youth ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Monday, August 11, 2014 - [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ Project - Y.A.N:D ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Monday, August 11, 2014 - [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ Project - Y.A.N:D ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ The National Network Opposing The Militarization of Youth ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Sunday, July 13, 2014 - [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ One Nation Under Surveillance ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Sunday, July 13, 2014 - [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ One Nation Under Surveillance ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ Disseminate Widely ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Saturday, January 18, 2014 - [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ Nullify The NSA - ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Saturday, January 18, 2014 - [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ Nullify The NSA - ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ Disseminate Widely ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Saturday, January 18, 2014 - [[[[[[[[[[[ Whatis - Income Tax Research ]]]]]]]]]]]]

Saturday, January 18, 2014 - [[[[[[[[[[[ Whatis - Income Tax Research ]]]]]]]]]]]]
[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ Stop Funding Criminal Government - Disseminate Widely ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Thursday, Sept 11, 2014 - [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ The Lone Gladio By Sibel Edmonds ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Thursday, Sept 11, 2014 - [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ The Lone Gladio By Sibel Edmonds ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ Disseminate Widely ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Thursday, Sept 11, 2014 - [[[[[[[ Bin Laden Worked With U.S. Government After 9/11 ]]]]]]

Thursday, Sept 11, 2014 - [[[[[[[ Bin Laden Worked With U.S. Government After 9/11 ]]]]]]
[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ Disseminate Widely ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Thursday, Sept 11, 2014 - [[[[[[ U.S. Government 'Directly Involved' In Terror Plots ]]]]]

Thursday, Sept 11, 2014 - [[[[[[ U.S. Government 'Directly Involved' In Terror Plots ]]]]]
[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ Disseminate Widely ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Thursday, October 12, 2015 - [[[[[[[[[[[[[[ The Attacks Will Be Spectacular ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Thursday, October 12, 2015 - [[[[[[[[[[[[[[ The Attacks Will Be Spectacular ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ Disseminate Widely ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Thursday, Sept 11, 2014 - [[[[[[[[[[[ Reality Check More Americans Rethinking 9/11 ]]]]]]]]]]

Thursday, Sept 11, 2014 - [[[[[[[[[[[ Reality Check More Americans Rethinking 9/11 ]]]]]]]]]]

Thursday, Sept 11, 2014 - [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ We Will N.E.V.E.R. Forget ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Thursday, Sept 11, 2014 - [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ We Will N.E.V.E.R. Forget ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ N.E.V.E.R. Forget ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Cost of War to the United States

Tuesday, February 21, 2012

Returning Military - Face Job Discrimination by Federal Govt. et al.

By Steve Vogel - Posting #201

"Yo Steve, It's not just returning Veterian's, but, any persons who has "Battlefield" skills that the Federial Government has deemed a threat (if "they" put this country into a state of Marshall Law).

Can ya hear me now? - Obama plan:Hire vets as cops, firefighters

After "years" of containment operations being used against our vets to lock them down, the US government shows it's endgame. Make vets "dependant" on government to survive as to contain and lock down their battlefield skills. [W.H.Y.]

This "transferance" should give all Americans a "heads-up" insomuch as to whats coming down the pike (long-term)."

Every year, more than a thousand National Guard, reserve and active-duty troops coming back from Iraq, Afghanistan or other military duties complain of being denied jobs or otherwise being penalized by employers because of their military obligations.

The biggest offender: the federal government.

It is against federal law for employers to penalize service members because of their military service. And yet, in some cases, the U.S. government has withdrawn job offers to service members unable to get released from active duty fast enough; in others, service members have been fired after absences.

In fiscal 2011, more than 18 percent of the 1,548 complaints of violations of that law involved federal agencies, according to figures obtained under the Freedom of Information Act.

“On the one hand, the government asked me to serve in Iraq,” said retired Army Brig. Gen. Michael Silva, a reservist who commanded a brigade in Iraq and was fired from his job as a U.S. Customs and Border Patrol contractor on his return. “On the other hand, another branch of government was not willing to protect my rights after serving.”

The federal government is the largest employer of citizen-soldiers. About 123,000 of the 855,000 men and women currently serving as Guard members and reservists, or about 14 percent, have civilian jobs with the federal government. Over a fourth of federal employees are veterans.

The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA), enacted in 1994 to ensure that members of the military do not face a disadvantage in their civilian careers because of their service, calls on the federal government be “a model employer” for service members.

But critics contend that the federal government has been far from perfect, and they fear that with troops back home from Iraq and more on the way from Afghanistan, violations of the law could increase.

Obama “priority

The problems persist even though the Obama administration has made a priority of cutting the rate of veterans’ unemployment, which is significantly higher among post-9/11 veterans than in the population as a whole.

Advocates for veterans say the system set up for service members to challenge alleged USERRA violations is onerous, with no single agency having oversight. And they note that the federal government doesn’t have much incentive to improve. The federal government can be ordered to pay back wages for being in willful violation of the law, but it incurs no other penalties. A private company, by contrast, could be liable for double an employee’s lost wages.

“There seems to be a feeling that the federal government can get away with what they’re doing,” said Matthew Estes, a USERRA lawyer with the law firm Tully Rinckey.

Some federal employers have forced reservists to leave military service as a condition of their hiring, which is also against the law, according to Samuel Wright, director of the Service Members Law Center at the Reserve Officers Association.

“Federal agencies are routinely doing that,” Wright said. (p.2) (p.3)

WAKE UP AMERICA!!!....Its "OUR" country!!!

Love "Light" and Energy



Employment Discrimination Law In The United States - A Fucking Joke!

Iraq War Draws To A Quiet Close

Veterans’ Unemployment Outpaces Civilian Rate

Senators Demand Military Lock Up American Citizens in a "Battlefield" Outside Your Window

Monday, February 13, 2012

Officer Accuses U.S. Military of Vast Afghan Deception/Delusions

By Stephen C. Webster - Posting #200

An internal report on the occupation of Afghanistan, penned by an active-duty military officer and published weeks ago - but not released by the Pentagon - was leaked on Friday by Rolling Stone reporter Michael Hastings, who called the 84-page examination "one of the most significant documents published by an active-duty officer in the past ten years."

The document, written by Lt. Col. Daniel L. Davis, explains there has been a 12-year-long cover-up of the reality on the ground in Afghanistan. Davis was the source of a New York Times feature last Sunday, which cited his report but did not release it.

The Pentagon has since launched an investigation of Davis for possible security violations.

Davis reportedly wrote two versions - one classified and one not - and briefed four members of Congress, both Republican and Democrat. Senior Pentagon officials also have the report, but they've decided not to release it. For that reason, the unclassified report was published by Rolling Stone on Friday afternoon.

"As I will explain in the following pages I have personally observed or physically participated in programs for at least the last 15 years in which the Army's senior leaders have either "stretched the truth" or knowingly deceived the US Congress and American public," Davis explains in his introduction.

"What I witnessed in my most recently concluded 12 month deployment to Afghanistan has seen that deception reach an intolerable low. I will provide a very brief summary of the open source information that would allow any American citizen to verify these claims. But if the public had access to these classified reports they would see the dramatic gulf between what is often said in public by our senior leaders and what is actually true behind the scenes. It would be illegal for me to discuss, use, or cite classified material in an open venue and thus I will not do so; I am no WikiLeaks guy Part II."

He essentially concludes that America's top generals should be placed under oath and questioned about incidents detailed in the report.

WAKE UP AMERICA!!!....Its "OUR" country!!!

Love "Light" and Energy



The Afghanistan Report the Pentagon Doesn't Want You to Read

Officer: U.S. paints false picture of Afghan war

Pentagon investigates colonel over critical report on US progress in Afghanistan

The report is available to read here (.pdf)

Thursday, February 9, 2012

RICO Court Blocks 9/11 Discovery (Again) - Sanctions Lawyers

By Terry Baynes - Posting #199 - Judge John M. Walker :o

(Reuters) - A federal appeals court sanctioned two California lawyers on Thursday over a lawsuit they filed, dismissed as frivolous, that accused former officials in the Bush administration of allowing the September 11 Pentagon attack to occur as part of a broad conspiracy.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit ordered the two lawyers to pay $15,000 total in sanctions in addition to double an unspecified amount the government spent defending the case.

Three attorneys -- Dennis Cunningham, William Veale and Mustapha Ndanusa -- filed the lawsuit in 2008 on behalf of April Gallop, a member of the U.S. Army injured in the Pentagon attack on September 11, 2001.

The lawyers accused then-Vice President Dick Cheney and then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld of allowing the Pentagon attack to occur through inaction, despite having what the suit described as real-time information that a hijacked plane was approaching.

The suit, which also questioned the nature of the attacks, said the inaction rose to the level of conspiracy to create a political atmosphere that would allow the U.S. government to pursue domestic and international policy objectives.

The suit accused the men and others of conspiracy to cause death and bodily harm and a violation of the Antiterrorism Act.

The September 11 attacks, carried out by 19 hijackers from the global militant network al Qaeda, led U.S. forces to invade Afghanistan to topple the Taliban rulers who had harbored al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.

That war served as a precursor to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq that toppled Saddam Hussein in 2003, which the administration chiefly justified by citing intelligence that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. No such weapons were subsequently found.

U.S. District Judge Denny Chin dismissed the case in 2010, ruling that the complaint was frivolous and a product of "cynical delusion and fantasy." A three-judge panel of the 2nd Circuit upheld that decision, imposing $15,000 in sanctions on the three lawyers for filing the suit. All three appealed.

In requesting a rehearing, the lawyers asked the court to disqualify the three-judge panel "and any like-minded colleagues" from participating in the decision to grant review, accusing the panel of "severe bias, based in active personal emotions arising from the 9/11 attack."

But the 2nd Circuit took exception to the request, concluding no attorney would make such a demand in good faith.

The court upheld sanctions against Veale and Cunningham but reversed them against Ndanusa, who only served a minor role as local counsel. Ndanusa said all of the lawyers acted in good faith in bringing the lawsuit.

The court also ordered Cunningham, who described himself as "the decider" in developing the case, to inform other federal courts in circuit of the sanctions order for the next year.

"We are not delusional by any means. We have the F.A.C.T.S., and they cannot be explained," said Veale, a former chief assistant public defender for Contra Costa County, California.

Cunningham did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

WAKE UP AMERICA!!!....Its "OUR" country!!!

Love "Light" and Energy


References: Why is Senator Maria Cantwell Shielding NIST from Investigation? [Hint]

BFP: Who is Ken, or Kenneth, Wainstein?

The Toronto Hearings

Obama Rewards Judges 5 Feb 2012

PBC Radio Show: 9/11 Case Against Cheney and Rumsfeld [.mp3 podcast]

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act

Money Trails Lead to Bush Judges :o

Judge John Walker, George Walker Bush’s Cousin, Judges April Gallop’s Suit

List Of Federal Judges Appointed by George W. Bush

U.S. Supreme RICO Court

April Gallop’s Attorney on The Kevin Barrett Show:

German Federal Judge, Deiter Dieseroth, stated in December 2009 that:

“No independent court has applied legal procedures to review the available evidence on who was responsible for the attacks.”

Also, that “it is not acceptable for a constitutional state…to declare war, bomb a foreign country, and place it under military occupation,” without first identifying suspects.

Dieseroth also said the U.S. “was under burden of proof” that Osama bin Laden was responsible for the attacks, yet the FBI admits it has no evidence presentable in court to back this up.

The stakes in this case are epic, including the possibility of an overwhelming transformation of the world’s understanding of history, not to mention American citizens’ relationship with their government.

Tuesday, February 7, 2012

Obama Drones: CIA Tactics in Pakistan Targeting Rescuers - Funerals

By Chris Woods/Christina Lamb - Posting #198 [My Ass]

The CIA’s drone campaign in Pakistan has killed dozens of civilians who had gone to help rescue victims or were attending funerals, an investigation by the Bureau for the Sunday Times has revealed.

The findings are published just days after President Obama claimed that the drone campaign in Pakistan was a ‘targeted, focused effort’ that ‘has not caused a huge number of civilian casualties.’

Speaking publicly for the first time on the controversial CIA drone strikes, Obama claimed last week they are used strictly to target terrorists, rejecting what he called ‘this perception we’re just sending in a whole bunch of strikes willy-nilly’.

‘Drones have not caused a huge number of civilian casualties’, he told a questioner at an on-line forum. ‘This is a targeted, focused effort at people who are on a list of active terrorists trying to go in and harm Americans’.

But research by the Bureau has found that since Obama took office three years ago, between 282 and 535 civilians have been credibly reported as killed including more than 60 children. A three month investigation including eye witness reports has found evidence that at least 50 civilians were killed in follow-up strikes when they had gone to help victims. More than 20 civilians have also been attacked in deliberate strikes on funerals and mourners. The tactics have been condemned by leading legal experts.

Although the drone attacks were started under the Bush administration in 2004, they have been stepped up enormously under Obama.

There have been 260 attacks by unmanned Predators or Reapers in Pakistan by Obama’s administration – averaging one every four days. Because the attacks are carried out by the CIA, no information is given on the numbers killed.

Administration officials insist that these covert attacks are legal. John Brennan, the president’s top counterterrorism adviser, argues that the US has the right to unilaterally strike terrorists anywhere in the world, not just what he called ‘hot battlefields’.

‘Because we are engaged in an armed conflict with al- Qaeda, the United States takes the legal position that, in accordance with international law, we have the authority to take action against al-Qaeda and its associated forces,’ he told a conference at Harvard Law School last year. ‘The United States does not view our authority to use military force against al-Qaeda as being restricted solely to”hot” battlefields like Afghanistan.’

State-sanctioned Extra-Judicial Executions

But some international law specialists fiercely disagree, arguing that the strikes amount to little more than state-sanctioned extra-judicial executions and questioning how the US government would react if another state such as China or Russia started taking such action against those they declare as enemies.

Related article: A question of legality

The first confirmed attack on rescuers took place in North Waziristan on May 16 2009. According to Mushtaq Yusufzai, a local journalist, Taliban militants had gathered in the village of Khaisor. After praying at the local mosque, they were preparing to cross the nearby border into Afghanistan to launch an attack on US forces. But the US struck first.

A CIA drone fired its missiles into the Taliban group, killing at least a dozen people. Villagers joined surviving Taliban as they tried to retrieve the dead and injured.

But as rescuers clambered through the demolished house the drones struck again. Two missiles slammed into the rubble, killing many more. At least 29 people died in total.

We lost very trained and sincere friends‘, a local Taliban commander told The News, a Pakistani newspaper. ‘Some of them were very senior Taliban commanders and had taken part in successful actions in Afghanistan. Bodies of most of them were beyond recognition.’

Related article: Witnesses Speak Out

For the Americans the attack was a success. A surprise tactic had resulted in the deaths of many Taliban. But locals say that six ordinary villagers also died that day, identified by Bureau field researchers as Sabir, Ikram, Mohib, Zahid, Mashal and Syed Noor (most people in the area use only one name).

Yusufzai, who reported on the attack, says those killed in the follow-up strike ‘were trying to pull out the bodies, to help clear the rubble, and take people to hospital.’ The impact of drone attacks on rescuers has been to scare people off, he says: ‘They’ve learnt that something will happen. No one wants to go close to these damaged building anymore.’

The Legal View

Naz Modirzadeh, Associate Director of the Program on Humanitarian Policy and Conflict Research (HPCR) at Harvard University, said killing people at a rescue site may have no legal justification.

‘Not to mince words here, if it is not in a situation of armed conflict, unless it falls into the very narrow area of imminent threat then it is an extra-judicial execution’, she said. ‘We don’t even need to get to the nuance of who’s who, and are people there for rescue or not. Because each death is illegal. Each death is a murder in that case.’

The Khaisoor incident was not a one-off. Between May 2009 and June 2011, at least fifteen attacks on rescuers were reported by credible news media, including the New York Times, CNN, Associated Press, ABC News and Al Jazeera.

It is notoriously difficult for the media to operate safely in Pakistan’s tribal areas. Both militants and the military routinely threaten journalists. Yet for three months a team of local researchers has been seeking independent confirmation of these strikes.

Eyewitness Accounts

The researchers have found credible, independently sourced evidence of civilians killed in ten of the reported attacks on rescuers. In five other reported attacks, the researchers found no evidence of any rescuers – civilians or otherwise – killed.

The researchers were told by villagers that strikes on rescuers began as early as March 2008, although no media carried reports at the time. The Bureau is seeking testimony relating to nine additional incidents.

Often when the US attacks militants in Pakistan, the Taliban seals off the site and retrieves the dead. But an examination of thousands of credible reports relating to CIA drone strikes also shows frequent references to civilian rescuers. Mosques often exhort villagers to come forward and help, for example – particularly following attacks that mistakenly kill civilians.

Other tactics are also raising concerns. On June 23 2009 the CIA killed Khwaz Wali Mehsud, a mid-ranking Pakistan Taliban commander. They planned to use his body as bait to hook a larger fish – Baitullah Mehsud, then the notorious leader of the Pakistan Taliban.

‘A plan was quickly hatched to strike Baitullah Mehsud when he attended the man’s funeral,’ according to Washington Post national security correspondent Joby Warrick, in his recent book The Triple Agent. ‘True, the commander… happened to be very much alive as the plan took shape. But he would not be for long.’

The CIA duly killed Khwaz Wali Mehsud in a drone strike that killed at least five others. Speaking with the Bureau, Pulitzer Prize-winner Warrick confirmed what his US intelligence sources had told him: ‘The initial target was no doubt a target anyway, as it was described to me, as someone that they were interested in. And as they were planning this attack, a possible windfall from that is that it would shake Mehsud himself out of his hiding place.’

Up to 5,000 people attended Khwaz Wali Mehsud’s funeral that afternoon, including not only Taliban fighters but many civilians. US drones struck again, killing up to 83 people. As many as 45 were civilians, among them reportedly ten children and four tribal leaders. Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud escaped unharmed, dying six weeks later along with his wife in a fresh CIA attack.

Clive Stafford-Smith, the lawyer who heads the Anglo-US legal charity Reprieve, believes that such strikes ‘are like attacking the Red Cross on the battlefield. It’s not legitimate to attack anyone who is not a combatant.’

Christof Heyns, a South African law professor who is United Nations Special Rapporteur on Extra- judicial Executions, agrees. ‘Allegations of repeat strikes coming back after half an hour when medical personnel are on the ground are very worrying’, he said. ‘To target civilians would be crimes of war.’ Heyns is calling for an investigation into the Bureau’s findings.

One of the most devastating attacks took place on March 17 last year, the day after Pakistan had released American CIA contractor Raymond Davis, jailed for shooting dead two men in Lahore. Davis had been held for two months and was released after the payment of blood money said to be around $2.3m.

A Case Of Retaliation?

The Agency was said to be furious at the affair. The following day when a massive drone strike killed up to 42 people gathered at a meeting in North Waziristan, Pakistani officials believed it to be retaliation.

The commander of Pakistan forces in the area at the time was Brigadier Abdullah Dogar. He admits that in drone attacks in general ‘people invariably get reported as innocent bystanders’. But in that case he has no doubt. ‘I was sitting there where our friends say they were targeting terrorists and I know they were innocent people’, he said.

Related Article: Get the Data: Obama’s Terror Drones

The mountains in the area contain chromite mines and the ownership was disputed between two tribes, so a Jirga or tribal meeting had been called to resolve the issue.

‘We in the Pakistan military knew about the meeting’, he said, ‘we’d got the request ten days earlier.’

‘It was held in broad daylight, people were sitting out in Nomada bus depot when the missile strikes came. Maybe there were one or two Taliban at that Jirga – they have their people attending – but does that justify a drone strike which kills 42 mostly innocent people?’

‘Drones may make tactical gains but I don’t see how there’s any strategic advantage’, he added. ‘When innocent people die, then you’re creating a whole lot more people with an issue.’

Growing Tensions

Drone attacks have long been a source of tension between the US and Pakistan despite the fact that the Pakistan government gave tacit agreement, even allowing them to fly from Shamsi airbase in the western province of Baluchistan, while publicly denouncing the attacks.

In return the US made sure that some of the terrorists killed were those targeting Pakistan.

However the relationship has been stretched to breaking point, first with the raid to kill Osama bin Laden in May and subsequent US accusations of Pakistani complicity, then the NATO bombing of a Pakistani post in November, killing 24 soldiers. In December Pakistan ordered the CIA to vacate the Shamsi base. For a while drone attacks stopped but they resumed two weeks ago.

The US claims the drones are a vital tool that have helped them almost wipe out the leadership of al Qaeda in Pakistan. But others point out they have stoked enormous anti-American sentiment in a country with an arsenal of 200 nuclear weapons.

Peter Singer, director of the 21st Century Initiative at the Brookings Institution, points out the operation has never been debated in Congress which has to approve sending US forces to war.

So dramatic is the switch to unmanned war that he says the US now has 7,000 drones operating and 12,000 more on the ground, while not a single new manned combat aircraft is under research or development at any western aerospace company.

After a remarkable lack of debate, there is starting to be unease in the US at the lack of transparency and accountability in the use of drones particularly as the campaign has expanded to hit targets in Libya, Yemen and Somalia and until recently to patrol the skies in Iraq.

Three US citizens were killed by missiles fired from drones in Yemen last September. Anwar al Awlaqi, an alleged al Qaeda operative, was deliberately targeted in what some have described as the US government’s first ever execution of one of its own citizens without trial. His colleague and fellow citizen Samir Khan also died in the attack. Two weeks later Awlaqi’s 16 year old son Abdulrahman died in a strike on alleged al Qaeda militants.

Such unmanned war is a politician’s dream, avoiding the inconvenience of sending someone’s son or daughter, mother or father, into harm’s way.

The fact that the operations are carried out by the CIA rather than the US military enables the administration to evade questions. The Agency press office responds to media inquiries on the subject with no comment and refusal to give names of those killed or who are on the target list.

Until Obama’s comments last week, the White House would not even confirm the programme existed.

‘We don’t discuss classified programs or comment on alleged strikes’, said a senior administration official in response to the findings presented by the Sunday Times.


The ACLU filed a lawsuit last week demanding the Obama administration release legal and intelligence records on the killing of the three US citizens in in Yemen.

Privately some senior US military officers say they are extremely uncomfortable at the way the administration is carrying out these operations using the CIA which is not covered by laws of war or the Geneva Convention.

The use of drones outside a declared war zone is seen by many legal experts as setting a dangerous precedent. Aside from allies such as Israel, Britain and France, other countries have drone technology including China, Russia and Pakistan. Iran recently captured a downed US drone.

Heyns, the UN rapporteur, said an international legal framework is urgently needed to govern their use.

‘Our concern is how far does it go – will the whole world be a theatre of war?’ he asked. ‘Drones in principle allow collateral damage to be minimised but because they can be used without danger to a country’s own troops they tend to be used more widely. One doesn’t want to use the term ticking bomb but it’s extremely seductive.’

Additional reporting by Rahimullah Yusufzai in Peshawar, Pakistan

Christina Lamb is the Washington Bureau Chief of the Sunday Times

WAKE UP AMERICA!!!....Its "OUR" country!!!

Love "Light" and Energy


References: Theater of the Absurd: US-NATO Support "Al Qaeda in Libya" :o

Obama Adviser Discusses Using Military on Terrorists

A Question Of Legality

25 Militants Are Killed in Attack in Pakistan

Witnesses Speak Out

Pakistan Says U.S. Drone Kills 13

Pakistani officials: Latest suspected drone attack kills 10

Suspected US missiles strikes kill 11 in Pakistan

Collateral Damage of U.S. Drone Attacks

US Drone Strikes Hit Pakistan

The Triple Agent: The Al-Qaeda Mole Who Infiltrated the CIA :o LOL

U.S. Drone Strike Said to Kill 60 in Pakistan

How Media Distortions Promote Wars - 1999-2008 Kosovo, Iraq, and Mid-East

Tens of millions of human beings have died starting with World War I, because well meaning Americans were taken in by public relations atrocity campaigns to get us to go to war for the benefit of other nations. See How to Get America to Go to War. Below are links about the Kosovo war as much as about Iraq.

We urge conservatives to look beyond the conservative media (NATIONAL REVIEW, WASHINGTON TIMES, HUMAN EVENTS, WALL STREET JOURNAL op-ed (the worst of all), FOX NEWS most of which are dominated by the Neo-conservatives, the War Party, and Empire wanters.. We refer you to Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting for updates on Middle East news distortions, the area of greatest propaganda and lies. Note also that American TV usually does not show the mangled bodies if caused by U.S. actions, which most of the rest of the world's TV does show. That's a major reason anyone seeing foreign TV broadcasts gets another view. U.S. networks are afraid to lose audience if they show pictures critical of suffering caused by U.S. policies. See also an excellent update on National Review and the "War" Street Journal

Truth, Lies and Afghanistan - How Military Leaders Have Let US Down

Behold: The U.S. God Of War - The Holy Fire of Patriotism

O Lord our God, ... help us to drown the thunder of the guns with the shrieks of their wounded, writhing in pain; help us to lay waste their humble homes with a hurricane of fire; help us to wring the hearts of their unoffending widows with unavailing grief; help us to turn them out roofless with little children to wander unfriended the wastes of their desolated land in rags and hunger and thirst, - Mark Twain

Independent Report Contradicts Western Portrait of Syria

While the Western media act like the Syrian government is wantonly and indiscriminately killing its own people without provocation, an independent investigation has found a different reality on the ground.

Specifically, over 160 monitors from the Arab League – comprised of both allies and mortal enemies of Syria – toured Syria and published a report on January 27th showing that the situation has been mischaracterized.

A Must Listen To: Guns and Butter, for January 18, 2012

Thanks goes out to Dr. Bramhall for this link :)

Download this clip (mp3, 10.28 megabytes)

"Iran and the Globalization of War" with Michel Chossudovsky.

Recent developments in the Middle East including the wider implications of the destabilization of the entire area; the current global war as a different kind of conquest than that of World War I and II; US military deployment in the area; the role of Israel; Iranian Defenses; US war planning and war scenarios since 2003 concerning the nation of Iran, including Austere Challenge 12, Theatre Iran Near Term, Global Strike 2003, Concept Plan 8022, and Vigilant Shield; the effect of sanctions; and The Responsibility To Protect.

Friday, February 3, 2012

Fact Checking the U.S. Media (Murder Inc.) Mind Viruses On Iran :o

By Just Foreign Policy - Posting #197

In the wake of the latest IAEA report on the status of Iran's nuclear program, the confrontational tone of the US media and politicians has escalated considerably. What's more, the same media and politicians have been distorting or falsely characterizing the findings of the report and of the US and Israeli intelligence communities, taking them to confirm that Iran is currently trying to acquire a nuclear weapons when, in fact, they do not.

Distortions and falsehoods justified one recent US war. We won't let them justify another.

In December, Just Foreign Policy began to aggressively monitor the media for these misleading practices. And some major media outlets have responded. Check out who's been nabbed, who's repented, and who just won't admit that they've done wrong.

Washington Post:

Offense: "Iran's quest to possess nuclear weapons"
Outcome: Full Acknowledgement, Formal Correction

In December, Just Foreign Policy initiated a campaign to get the Washington Post to correct a photo gallery headline which asserted as if it were fact the mere allegation that Iran has a nuclear weapons program. Over 1500 Just Foreign Policy advocates emailed the Post ombudsman, Patrick Pexton. In response, the Post edited their headline and added an editor's note to explain the change. Mr. Pexton also wrote about the issue in his Sunday column.

Read more:

* Victory! WaPo Fixes Headline Claiming Iran Has Nuclear Weapons Program, Megan Iorio, Just Foreign Policy Blog, December 7, 2011
* On Complaints Over Iran Nuclear Weapon Claims, WaPo Ombud Rules for the Plaintiffs, Robert Naiman, Huffington Post, December 12, 2011
* Getting Ahead of the Facts on Iran, Patrick Pexton, Washington Post, December 9, 2011

Offense: "Iran's quest for a nuclear weapon"
Outcome: Text Corrected, No Correction Published

On January 19, 2012, a Washington Post article evoked a bit of deja vu when it claimed that "Israel’s supporters worry that Iran’s quest for a nuclear weapon and greater instability in the Middle East pose existential threats to Israel," despite the fact that the paper's own ombudsman had agreed just a month before that this particular shorthand was "misleading." An email was sent to Mr. Pexton, the Post's ombudsman, informing him of the infraction. The online text was subsequently corrected, about six hours after its initial publication. Read the full account, with original screenshots >

New York Times:

Offense: "Iran's nuclear program has a military objective"
Outcome: Acknowledgement; Text Corrected, No Correction Published

On January 4, 2012, the New York Times published an article that falsely claimed that the latest IAEA report assessed that "Iran's nuclear program has a military objective." The Times deleted this error without publishing a correction. What's more, on the same day, another article in the Times referred to Iran's "development of nuclear weapons" as if it were a known fact that Iran were engaging in such activity.

Robert Naiman's article on the issue was published in a number of outlets, including the Huffington Post and Al Jazeera. Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting also picked up the case and issued an action alert. The Times public editor ultimately responded in his column, recognizing the justice of our criticism, but falling short of publishing a correction.

Read more:

* The New York Times misleading public on Iran, Robert Naiman, Al Jazeera, January 9, 2012
* On Iran IAEA Reporting Complaints, NYT Public Editor Rules For The Plaintiffs , Robert Naiman, Huffington Post, January 10, 2012
* Times errors: Iran’s nukes, SF’s voting, Arthur Brisbane, New York Times, January 10, 2012


Offense: US policy "to convince Iran to give up a nuclear weapons program"
Outcome: Maintains Innocence, Will Not Correct

On January 8, 2012, NPR's Weekend Edition Sunday reporter Tom Gjelten said, "The goal for the U.S. and its allies … [is] to convince Iran to give up a nuclear weapons program." But one cannot give up something one does not have, and thus this claim implied that Iran has a nuclear weapons program, which is not a known fact. Just Foreign Policy began a campaign to get NPR to issue a correction, but the ombudsman instead defended the reporting with a rather sketchy linguistic analysis of the indefinite article.


Offense: Panetta's assertion, "Are they trying to develop a nuclear weapon? No."
Outcome: Maintains Innocence, Will Not Correct

Just Foreign Policy joined FAIR in calling out PBS's NewsHour in their misleading edit of a clip in which Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta stated that Iran is not trying to develop a nuclear weapon at the moment; however, US intelligence believes them to be seeking a nuclear capability. NewsHour edited out the first part of the quote, only leaving the part about Iran seeking a nuclear capability, thus potentially misleading viewers into believing that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons.

PBS's ombudsman was admittedly "mystified" by the edit. Even the NewsHour editor responsible for the segment said that "it would have been better had we not lopped off the first part of the Panetta quote." However, PBS did not go so far as to claim wrongdoing, and refused to issue a correction.

Meet the Press:

Offense: Santorum made false claim that Iran doesn't allow weapons inspectors
Outcome: No Acknowledgement

On January 1, 2012, Rick Santorum, candidate for the Republican nomination for president, told David Gregory on NBC's Meet the Press that, unlike President Obama, he would "be saying to the Iranians, you either open up those [nuclear] facilities, you begin to dismantle them and, and make them available to inspectors, or we will degrade those facilities through airstrikes and make it very public that we are doing that." Gregory did not challenge this claim, even though he should have known full well that Iran's nuclear program is currently under inspection by the IAEA. NBC, Meet the Press, nor David Gregory responded to our criticism. Read more >

WAKE UP AMERICA!!!....Its "OUR" country!!!

Love "Light" and Energy


References: Current Actions

Iran: This Is What Propaganda Looks Like

WaPo: Fact-Check "Iran's Quest to Possess Nuclear Weapons"

Victory! WaPo Fixes Headline Claiming Iran Has Nuclear Weapons Program

On Complaints Over Iran Nuclear Weapon Claims, WaPo Ombud Rules for the Plaintiffs

Getting Ahead Of The Facts On Iran

WaPo: Still Getting Ahead of the Facts on Iran

The New York Times misleading public on Iran

On Iran IAEA Reporting Complaints, NYT Public Editor Rules For The Plaintiffs

Times errors: Iran’s nukes, SF’s voting :o

U.S., Iran Play Economic Knockdown

Tell PBS, NPR: No Proof Iran Has a Nuclear Weapons Program

Is NPR Fomenting A War With Iran? No.

PBS's Dishonest Iran Edit

A FAIR Catch But UnFAIR Conclusion

Meet The Press Transcript January 12, 2012

David Gregory Tell Rick Santorum There Are UN Inspectors in Iran

TOPs Blogger Role