Wednesday, December 29, 2010

Poll Reveals Americans Opposed to Government Takeover of Internet





Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
December 29, 2010

According to a recent Rasmussen’s poll, most Americans understand the FCC’s internet regulations will be used by the government to push a political agenda.

54% of respondents oppose the FCC effort to regulate the internet while 21% support it. 25% are not sure. By a 52% to 27% margin, Rasmussen reported on December 28, voters believe that more free market competition is better than more regulation for protecting internet users. Most Democrats see an unbiased regulatory approach, while most Republicans and unaffiliated voters fear a political agenda.

In April, a Rasmussen poll revealed that just 27% of Americans believed the Federal Communications Commission should regulate the internet like it does television and radio.

Internet regulation was the hallmark of Obama in 2008 as he ran for president. After installing Genachowski as FCC chairman, the Obama administration started to move on its promise to regulate the internet. The FCC began to act like a fiefdom and told a federal appeals court it had the power to impose regulation on broadband rates, even though Congress had not given the agency the power to do so.

In fact, 300 members of Congress, including a large number of Democrats, told the FCC in no uncertain terms to stop its attempt to grab power over the internet. The FCC temporarily changed tack and convened negotiations over the summer with a select group of industry representatives and proponents of internet regulation.

In August, the FCC worked with House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman on a draft bill codifying network management rules.

The FCC decided before Christmas to make its move. Obama said the new government regulation will “help preserve the free and open nature of the Internet.” In fact, it would do just the opposite.

Genachowski and the FCC naturally try to make this unwarranted move look like a white knight government protecting consumers against greedy telecommunications companies and ISPs. Beyond the rhetoric about “net neutrality,” however, lies the real purpose of the FCC regulations – government control and censorship.

“What governments around the world are suddenly beginning to realize is that a free internet is ultimately incompatible with government secrets, and secrets are essential to any government that wants to remain in power,” writes Mike Adams of Natural News. “As part of a long-term plan to control content on the internet, the FCC is now attempting to assert authority over the internet in the same way it has long exercised content censorship authority over broadcast television and radio.”

Adams argues that the FCC is attempting to assert its authority over the internet. “By asserting its authority with net neutrality, the FCC will establish a beachhead of implied authority from which it can begin to control and censor the internet,” he writes.

Obama’s FCC commissariat is not losing sleep over the First Amendment. It was the FCC’s Chief Diversity Officer Mark Lloyd who said that “blind references to freedom of speech or the press serve as a distraction from the critical examination of other communications policies,” namely converting the internet into the same government regulated medium as television and radio.

Prior to the FCC vote, the United Nations announced its plan to regulate the internet.

“The United Nations is also aiming to run the Internet for you,” warns Joseph A. Klein. “With the backing of governments around the world who don’t mind free-riding on American investment and know-how in the Internet while seeking as many ways as possible to usurp control over its governance, the UN establishment has been trying for years to move control of the Internet’s day-to-day management to some sort of global governance forum.”

Efforts by the FCC and the United Nations at the behest of the globalists are contrary to the model that has emerged since the technology was invented in 1973 and became public in the early 1990s.

“The beauty of the Internet is that it’s not controlled by any one group. Its governance is bottoms-up – with academics, non-profits, companies and governments all working to improve this technological wonder of the modern world. This model has not only made the Internet very open – a testbed for innovation by anyone, anywhere – it’s also prevented vested interests from taking control,” wrote Vint Cerf, who is often called the father of the internet, in response to the UN proposal to regulate the internet.

A free and open internet is anathema to government as it moves to control nations, populations, and telecommunications. In order to succeed and build world government and its accompanying control grid, the internet must be tamed and folded into the established propaganda apparatus.

The machinations of the FCC and the United Nations reveal once again how worried the establishment is about a free and open internet. The internet cannot be allowed to be a primary and growing source of alternative information that challenges daily the corporate media propaganda system that acts like a megaphone for a control freak government.



The Rasmussen poll reveals that while many Americans may not fully understand the underlying reasons for government control of the internet – to stifle opposition to the government in the same way the Chinese have – they are steadfastly opposed to more regulation.

Tuesday, December 21, 2010

Homeland Security’s Coming War Against 9/11 Truth Activists


Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
December 21, 2010

Rep. Peter King of New York is about to become chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee. On Saturday, King announced he will hold hearings on the “radicalization of the American Muslim community.” King is convinced al-Qaeda has penetrated America and is now recruiting citizens to engage in terrorist acts.

“We want to assess the extent of the radicalization of the Muslim community,” said King. “It’s clear to me there has not been sufficient cooperation.”



American Muslims are rightfully afraid and outraged by King’s call for McCarthy-like hearings.

9/11 truth activists should be too.

Earlier today Newsday posted an op-ed by King, where he wrote the following:

In the days following 9/11, I made several television and radio appearances supporting American Muslims, saying that they had nothing to do with the attacks and were as loyal and patriotic as any Americans. I particularly warned that we could not do to Muslims what was done to Japanese-Americans after Pearl Harbor.

Even today I cannot begin to describe the disappointment, anger and outrage I felt when, barely a month after those attacks that killed so many hundreds of Long Islanders, prominent Long Island Muslim leaders were insisting there was no evidence that al-Qaida was responsible for the attacks — even saying it could have been the CIA, the FBI or the Zionists!

Even more troubling is that to this day, no Muslim leader has denounced those vile remarks. Nor did Newsday say a word about these slanders — no moral outrage or condemnation. No demand for an apology or even an explanation. (Emphasis added.)

In other words, if you doubt the official fairy tale – as millions of Americans do – Rep. King considers you a peddler of “vile remarks.” You may be the subject of a future House “investigation” that doubles for a witch hunt or inquisition.

Stock up for the Holidays with eFoodsDirect and get FREE Shipping! (Ad)

It is not strictly Muslims the government has targeted for failure to buy into the absurd nonsense that Arab cave dwellers made NORAD stand down and suspended the law of physics on September 11, 2001.

The term “white al-Qaeda” was created for a specific reason.

Monday, December 20, 2010

TSA Admits Lying About Naked Boy Controversy



Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
December 20, 2010

The TSA has been caught in yet another act of public deception after the agency was forced to admit that it lied when it initially claimed a 5-year-old boy was strip-searched at Salt Lake City International Airport last month because he had set off a metal detector.

The video of a disgruntled father removing his young son’s shirt so TSA agents could pat down the boy arrived at the height of the outrage against Big Sis last month and prompted widespread condemnation of ludicrous airport security measures. One of the media personalities who spearheaded the TSA revolt, Matt Drudge, ran the story at the top of his website for nearly two days.

The TSA tried to placate the fury many Americans felt when watching the clip by claiming that the boy had set off a metal detector and therefore had to be subjected to advanced screening. Even after the boy’s shirt was removed, he was still subjected to a pat down around his genital area.

However, Utah Republican Rep. Jason Chaffetz, who will soon take charge of the House subcommittee overseeing the TSA, forced the agency to back down and concede that the TSA’s original statement was a total fabrication.

“I said, ‘You guys knew that at the beginning. You lied at the beginning,’” Chaffetz told the Salt Lake Tribune.

“New information was brought to light that indicated the initial report was incorrect,” the TSA said, admitting that the boy was patted down not because he set off a metal detector but due to “bulky clothing”.

However, the video clearly shows that the only item of clothing the boy is wearing is a pullover sweatshirt – he is not wearing a bulky coat or anything of that nature. So in effect, the TSA has attempted to cover up a lie with yet another lie, in its farcical efforts to justify groping naked 5-year-old boys in the name of security.

As we have documented, the TSA has proven itself to be completely untrustworthy and deceitful, having lied about almost every issue related to airport security since the very outset.

- Immediately after naked body scanners were introduced, TSA lied in claiming that scanner images did not show intricate details of genitalia, a claim disproved by images taken from the TSA’s own website which clearly show the size and detail of a man’s penis, as well as several incidents where airport security workers have abused the scanners to ogle naked pictures of their colleagues and go on to describe details of their genitalia.

- Janet Napolitano herself brazenly lied when she claimed that Johns Hopkins University had studied naked body scanners and declared them to be completely safe. In reality, Dr Michael Love, who runs an X-ray lab at the department of biophysics and biophysical chemistry at the Johns Hopkins school of medicine stated, “statistically someone is going to get skin cancer from these X-rays,” adding, “…we have a situation at the airports where people are so eager to fly that they will risk their lives in this manner.”

- TSA has consistently lied in claiming that naked body scanner images cannot be stored, a claim disproved by a Homeland Security letter which specifically states that the machines “have the capability to retain and export images”.

- TSA continues to lie about the fact that it temporarily curtailed security measures as a political ploy to deflate the national opt out day protest, despite verified reports from all over the country confirming that body scanner machines were roped off and aggressive pat downs were dispensed with.

- TSA has been caught in numerous other lies, all of which are documented here.

Given the plethora of examples of TSA deceit, and the agency’s ceaseless habit of lying to cover up its own malfeasance, state and local authorities across the country need to unite and follow New Jersey’s example by kicking the bums out for good, eliminating the TSA not only from airports, but as a federal agency altogether.

Thursday, December 16, 2010

YouTube Allows Users to Flag Content as Terror Promotion


Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
December 16, 2010

Google’s YouTube now allows users to flag content that allegedly supports terrorism. Google claims to have instituted this policy after receiving complaints.

YouTube now allows you to declare videos the product of nefarious terrorists.

In May, the government told YouTube to censor content on the site. Senator Joe Lieberman wrote a letter to Google CEO Eric Schmidt. “A great majority of these videos document horrific attacks on American soldiers in Iraq or Afghanistan,” said Lieberman.

He also said other videos “provide weapons training, speeches by al-Qaeda leadership, and general material intended to radicalize potential recruits.”

Around the time the government instructed Google and YouTube what to do with their content, two former CIA officials admitted to creating a fake video in which intelligence officers dressed up as Osama Bin Laden and his cronies. The CIA actually considered creating a fake video of Saddam Hussein engaged in sexual acts with a teenage boy and flooding Iraq with copies.

In 2007, expert computer analyst Neal Krawetz presented evidence revealing that al-Qaeda tapes were forgeries. “Krawetz’s most telling discovery comes in the form of a detail contained in a 2006 Ayman al-Zawahiri tape. From his analysis he concludes that the As-Sahab logo (the alleged media arm of Al-Qaeda) and the IntelCenter logo (a U.S. based private intelligence organization that “monitors terrorist activity”) were both added to the video at the same time,” Paul Joseph Watson wrote on August 2, 2007.

The IntelCenter is linked to iDefense, a web security company staffed with ex-military intelligence officers. Its purpose is to disseminate propaganda that supports the profitable manufactured war on cave dwellers and a variety of operatives and patsies that work either witting or unwittingly for the CIA and other intelligence agencies.

After Lieberman leaned on Google, the company encouraged users to flag content they found objectionable. Now YouTube has added an option to flag content users believe promotes the sort of terrorism the government and its corporate media propaganda apparatus have propagandized the public for nearly a decade to believe actually exists.

In February, YouTube introduced “Safety Mode,” a filter designed to filter out objectionable content. “Sexually related content is not the only thing that will be affected by safety mode. A newsworthy video that contains graphic violence such as a political protest or war coverage would also be included, YouTube said,” AppScout reported.

It is obvious where all of this is going headed. Users will now flag Alex Jones videos and hundreds of other truth videos as terrorist promotion. Google’s YouTube will remove the videos and will then say the content was removed at user request.

Lieberman’s letter and Google’s response are part of an ongoing psy-op designed to convince people that terrorists are working feverishly to destroy America because Muslims hate us for our freedoms. It is a classic example of problem-reaction-solution.

The CIA created what is now called al-Qaeda from the remnants of the Afghan Mujahideen in the 1980s. The CIA and military intelligence have produced a series of audio and video tapes portraying a number of al-CIA-duh scary operatives in turbans threatening Americans. These have complimented absurd terror events like the Christmas underwear and Times Square non-bombings. In response to these ludicrous events, government officialdom has warned the internet may need to be regulated for our own good. Google and YouTube have played their part by introducing an option that allows users to censor videos purportedly discovered and posted by a military intelligence front company. In this way, people can decide for themselves what is terrorism.

Not that Google is an innocent bystander. It was created with CIA seed money, according to ex-CIA agent Robert David Steele.

“I think Google took money from the CIA when it was poor and it was starting up and unfortunately our system right now floods money into spying and other illegal and largely unethical activities, and it doesn’t fund what I call the open source world,” Steele told Alex Jones in December, 2006.

Monday, December 13, 2010

Breaking News: Wikileaks Hacktivists Shut Down Amazon’s European Websites





Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Sunday, December 12, 2010.




UPDATE: Amazon’s websites have just come back online. The down time was a good two hours. Twitter is still raging on the issue.

It appears that Wikileaks hacktivists have made good on their threat to take down one of the Internet’s global behemoths. Amazon’s European websites are down and inaccessible, costing the company untold millions on one of the busiest shopping days of the year in the run up to Christmas.

Firing the biggest salvo in what hacktivists have dubbed a new cyber-war, Wikileaks supporters have seemingly exacted revenge for Amazon removing Julian Assange’s website from its cloud network of servers at the behest of Joe Lieberman’s Senate Homeland Security Committee ten days ago.

“Catching you up to speed, it is entirely possible that Anonymous, the 4chan-started “hacking” group could be behind the down time. The group, which has tossed attacks at MasterCard, Visa and PayPal since the arrest of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange has claimed in the past that it would target Amazon. It was widely known that Wikileaks was using the Amazon DNS services, and Amazon then pulled the site from the services due to its activities,” reports TheNextWeb.

I was personally trying to buy Christmas presents at around 8pm GMT on Amazon.co.uk. The website became increasingly lethargic before it went down altogether.

Amazon’s websites in France, Germany and Italy are also all offline at time of writing, although Amazon.com is still accessible at the present time.

Wednesday, December 08, 2010

Assange Prosecution: A Brazen Effort to Kill Alternative Media



Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
December 8, 2010

Now that Wikileaks founder Julian Assange is in custody, we can expect the U.S. government to request his extradition and prosecute the Australian for espionage. “Any such proceedings would set up a test of whether the First Amendment’s protection for a free press extends to a website with a worldwide audience,” notes McClatchy today.

The Supreme Court rejected a Nixon administration effort to stop the New York Times and the Washington Post from publishing the Pentagon Papers.

In 1917 the United States enacted the Espionage Act, a law that has made it a crime to “willfully communicate” secret government information that could expose national secrets held by officialdom. Since the law was passed, however, the government has avoided prosecuting journalists for publishing classified information.

“The First Amendment’s freedom of speech and the press has protected journalists in the past, though it is not clear whether the courts would consider Assange a journalist,” writes McClatchy.

Assange’s “actions are not those of a responsible journalist that would enjoy the protection of the Constitution,” opines Jeffrey H. Smith, a former general counsel at the CIA. Government, of course, will decided what is responsible and irresponsible journalism and the high court will enshrine this in law.

The establishment – including its highest court – may eventually restrict the First Amendment and have its protection apply only to selected corporate media journalists and other propaganda functionaries of the elite.

Any such ruling by the Supreme Court will send a message to investigative journalists and alternative news organizations and publications – you will be prosecuted for revealing “government secrets,” in short it may soon be illegal to report information the government wants to keep hidden from the American people.

According to a Congressional Research Service analysis, the Supreme Court has not resolved the question of “whether, in cases where information has been acquired unlawfully by a newspaper or by a source, government may ever punish not only the unlawful acquisition, but the ensuing publication as well.”

A d v e r t i s e m e n t
In 1971, the Supreme Court rejected a Nixon administration effort to stop the New York Times and the Washington Post from publishing the Pentagon Papers. Nixon’s effort to prosecute leakers Daniel Ellsberg and the late Anthony Russo – who were not journalists, but RAND corporation researchers – was dismissed due to “prosecutorial misconduct.”

The Supremes indicated, however, that it would have been possible for the government to prosecute the newspapers involved.

“Freedom of speech is a basic US constitutional right,” notes the Christian Science Monitor. “““What Assange and WikiLeaks may have done, however, is set up a lawyer’s dream of a case which would allow the Supreme Court to resolve a conflict between two basic rights — the right to speak, and the right of the US to hold close its secrets.”

The Obama administrarion has declared the Wikileaks “disclosures put at risk our diplomats, intelligence professionals, and people around the world who come to the United States for assistance in promoting democracy and open government.”

In fact, the disclosures put at risk the widespread government policy of withholding information from the American people.

In 2006, Patrice McDermott, director of OpenTheGovernment.org, said that every “administration wants to control information about its policies and practices, but the current [Bush] administration has restricted access to information about our government and its policies at unprecedented levels. The result has been the suppression of discussions about our country’s direction and its security. How can the public or even Congress make informed decisions under such circumstances? The movement away from public accountability must be reversed.”

A record number of Freedom of Information Act requests indicate government is becoming more secretive, not less.

Declarations of transparency and open government notwithstanding, the Obama administration has continued the concerted effort to keep the American people in the dark about the operation of its government, especially in regard to foreign policy.

Never mind the idiocy of government officials and neocons such as William Kristol who have called for not only harassing, kidnapping, and “neutralizing” Julian Assange and the Wikileaks operation, the ultimate result will be to harass and neutralize the alternative media that continues to draw millions of people away from government propaganda disseminated by the corporate media.

In order to convert the United States into a third world slave gulag with a high-tech police state overlay, the ruling elite will target and attempt to liquidate alternative media. Eventually extraditing and prosecuting Julian Assange as an enemy of the state is an important element in the effort to kill the First Amendment and the Bill of Rights.

Monday, November 22, 2010

TSA Tactics Find Ominous Parallel in Nazi Germany




Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
November 21, 2010

The TSA is part of a larger effort to implement a slow motion surveillance and high-tech police state control grid in America. It is an element of the “alternative geography” of the military-corporate-intelligence establishment, an aspect specifically designed to acclimate Americans to the prospect of an ever encroaching police state. The tight integration of the corporate-government aspect of this alternative geography is demonstrated by the relationship the government has with the Chertoff Group, a public relations firm pushing naked body scanners founded by Michael Chertoff, the former boss of the Department of Homeland Security.

The new procedures defended over the weekend by Barry Obama from a NATO summit in Portugal are not about finding the next underwear bomber and protecting the American people from al-Qaeda. The latest procedures are designed to get the American people accustomed to the idea that the police, the alternative geography of the military-corporate-intelligence network, and the government will micro-manage and control the public and eventually all aspects of our private lives. Events reveal that the government is not interested in preventing an al-Qaeda attack, but keeping tabs on and when possible subverting opposition to its power.

It took Hitler and the Nazis nearly a decade to impose a murderous police state on the German people. In the wake of the staged burning of the Reichstag in February of 1933, the Nazis suspended the civil liberties of the German people and began a concerted effort to eliminate all opposition to their fascist regime. The Nazis would later stage a false flag incident known as the Gleiwitz incident in order to provide and excuse to invade Poland and start the Second World War.

Left unchallenged, government invariably evolves into a tyrannical force at odds with the interest of the people. Minus effective opposition, the people of Germany had little choice but to support Hitler and his ill-fated war.

It has taken the federal government and its Department of Homeland Security – an agency on the drawing board well before September 11, 2001 – to implement police state tactics in regard to travel that far surpass anything devised by the Nazis.

Even before the attacks of September 11, 2001, the government planned to create and impose a police state control grid on the American people. For instance, the Bill of Rights crushing Patriot Act was devised well before the attack and its predecessor, the 1996 Antiterrorism Act, was rushed into law following the first suspicious attack on the World Trade Center and the equally suspicious attack in Oklahoma City. Habeas corpus law was forever changed by the law touted by then president Bill Clinton.

Armed with its new and draconian palette of laws and mandates, the federal government, including the FBI, the CIA, and the Pentagon, have exploited the September 11 attacks to go after the real enemy – the American people.

Coming soon to an airport near you — strip searches.

The Pentagon has surveilled the antiwar movement and the Department of Homeland Security with its state level partners in Missouri and elsewhere around the country have profiled entirely legal “rightwing” political organizations and individuals as potential terrorists. The corporate media, acting as the establishment’s ministry of propaganda, has amplified this absurd terrorist myth.

As the founders realized, government left to its own devices and unrestrained by the people invariably turns into a tyrannical leviathan. Groping TSA screeners and dangerous radiation naked body scanners are the public visage of the state as it slowly morphs into a high-tech tyranny.

Just as in Nazi Germany, the authorities-that-be are forcing women, children and men to strip search. Now it is happening in the United States of America, a supposedly free country.

President Barry Obama, DHS boss Janet Napolitano, and TSA director John Pistole have said naked body scanners will remain and the sexual molestation at America’s airports will continue.

“I understand how difficult it is, and how offensive it must be for the people who are going through it,” said Secretary of State Clinton today. Clinton said the government is “trying to do the right thing” by expanding the intrusive nature of the police state.

“Clinton has likely rarely, if ever, dealt with metal detectors, explosives swabs, full-body backscatter scanners or pat-downs as an air traveler since she began receiving Secret Service protection with her husband, former President Bill Clinton, in 1992,” reports the Christian Science Monitor.

Wednesday, November 03, 2010

Rand Paul Promises To Challenge GOP Establishment




Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones
Infowars.com
November 3, 2010

On the same day that he swept to victory in the Kentucky Senate race, Rand Paul immediately contradicted doubters who warned that he would compromise and begin to support neo-con political policies by promising to challenge the GOP establishment while also working to cut the bloated US defense budget.

During an election day interview with CNN, Paul said that he would work to change “the whole government” because “both Democrats and Republicans have shown themselves to be untrustworthy,” calling for a constitutional amendment to balance the budget and a sunset of “all regulations” passed by unelected bureaucrats unless they are approved by Congress.

Contradicting criticism that Paul would seek to prolong and expand US military operations abroad and that he was just another “neo-con,” the Senator to be promised to look at not just cutting the domestic budget, but also cutting waste in the military budget, which has ballooned under Obama as he continues the Bush-era occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq, while launching new drone attacks in Pakistan and Yemen.

“I do believe national defense is the most important thing the federal government does, but I do think there is waste in the military budget, and I will be one of those who will reach across the aisle to the Democrats and say ‘we will tackle waste throughout the length and breadth of the budget,” said Paul.

As we repeatedly highlighted, Paul’s neo-con rhetoric on Israel, Afghanistan and other geopolitical issues was just him playing politics in order to secure victory over Democrat Jack Conway. As soon as Paul knew he was in the clear and destined to be victorious, he immediately made it clear that expanding unconstitutional wars would not characterize his tenure as Senator.

When the host attempted to question Paul’s commitment to his values by pointing out that he embraced the support of establishment Republican Senate leader Mitch McConnell, Paul said that he would challenge the GOP on a day to day basis.

Statists who helped to contrive smear after smear in an effort to derail Paul’s campaign were noticeably crestfallen when he was confirmed as the winner in Kentucky. MSNBC talking heads, including Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow, ludicrously claimed that Paul’s commitment to a balanced budget would cause a “worldwide depression,” lead to global anarchy and the collapse of governments around the planet.

Given Paul’s commitment to offering an alternative to the devastation wrought by decades of Democrat and Republican deal-making, it’s vital that Rand Paul forms a caucus of like-minded lawmakers who will pursue a plethora of neglected issues that are imperative if America is to be saved from total economic and political collapse.

Chief amongst them, ending NAFTA and GATT, reducing the trade deficit, pushing through massive tax cuts, ending Obamacare, reversals of gun control laws, securing the border, and a workable plan for stabilizing the dollar.

Indeed, during an interview with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, Paul already indicated that he will start a Tea Party caucus. We as observers need to make sure that it includes the right people and embraces the right issues. This needs to be more than a Tea Party caucus, it needs to be a save the Republic caucus. We cannot afford to have a Newt Gingrich lead the whole thing down the rabbit hole as happened in 1994.

We firmly believe that Paul’s political capital needs to be spent by building a powerful alliance of limited government proponents, which of course would be headed up by Rand himself along with his father, Congressman Ron Paul.

Now that the Tea Party has got its foot in the door of Washington, its most successful leaders need to make it clear that the anti-big government movement will not be compromised by the establishment GOP, and will not be hijacked by Republican insiders.

Rand Paul’s promise that we will take on the establishment GOP and cut military spending is the first salvo in a war of political attrition that will define whether the Tea Party movement is infiltrated and deflated, or whether it goes on to become a truly dominant force for driving peace and prosperity in America.

Monday, November 01, 2010

Toner Bomb Plot Used to Empower CIA


Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
November 1, 2010

In addition to adding new urgency and a fresh dose of hysteria to the flagging war on manufactured terror, the toner bomb plot has provided an excuse to rationalize the global reach of the CIA.

“Officials said support was growing both within the military and the administration for shifting more operational control to the CIA — a move that would allow the U.S. to strike suspected terrorist targets unilaterally with greater stealth and speed,” reports the Wall Street Journal today. “Allowing the U.S. military’s Special Operations Command units to operate under the CIA would give the U.S. greater leeway to strike at militants even without the explicit blessing of the Yemeni government,” or the American people who, as usual, remain woefully uninformed.

Corporate media does its part to justify expanding war on terror into Yemen.

The United States Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) conducts several covert and clandestine missions, such as unconventional warfare, foreign internal defense, special reconnaissance, psychological operations, direct action, counter-terrorism and war on drugs operations.

Exploiting the obviously contrived Yemen toner bomb plot (see Paul Watson’s article today) as an excuse to shift more operational control to an unaccountable CIA would reduce conflict between the CIA’s National Clandestine Service and the more clandestine parts of USSOCOM. It would also consolidate operations.

Moreover, a commissioned Pentagon study revealed that such a move would allow the CIA to maintain its covert capability and be the “sole government agency conducting covert action.” The DoD found that under U.S. law and the Constitution it does not have the legal authority to conduct covert action, nor the “operational agility” to carry out these types of missions.

Since the creation of the National Security State in the late 1940s, the CIA has used covert operations to consistently overthrow governments and install favored actors in power. “Covert action should not be confused with missionary work,” said Henry Kissinger in 1975 after the U.S. government betrayed the Kurds of Iraq.

In the 1980s, former CIA agent John Stockwell estimated that the agency has run thousands of covert operations since its inception, “all designed to disrupt, destabilize, or modify the activities of other countries.”

We are told the Obama administration is behind the effort to put the CIA’s “elite U.S. hunter-killer teams that operate secretly” inside Yemen, but the effort transcends any perceived rule by the teleprompter reader in chief.

As author John Prados notes, the CIA does not answer to the president or Congress. “Covert action has never been under complete presidential control, even as presidents have total authority to order it,” he writes. Under the 1947 National Security Act, the CIA remains beyond Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution that expressly reserves to Congress, not the president, the right to give letters of marque, the eighteenth-century equivalent of grants of combatant status.

Since September 11, 2001, U.S. foreign policy has shifted further into covert and illegal action in violation of the Constitution. Under Obama, the CIA has ramped up the covert war against CIA-ISI created elements inside Pakistan, an effort begun in earnest during the Bush regime.

In late October, Agence France-Presse reported that the CIA had authorized “officers and special operations military trainers to enter the country to intensify pressure” on “militants” created and supported through a collaboration between U.S. and Pakistani intelligence, although this is rarely if ever noted by the corporate media.

“The number of CIA personnel in Pakistan has grown substantially in recent years, [the Wall Street Journal] said. But the exact number is highly classified…. A senior Pakistani official said relations with the CIA remain strong but Islamabad continues to oppose a large increase in the number of American personnel on the ground.”

Since the staged underwear non-bombing last Christmas, the U.S. has steadily increased its military presence in Yemen and the Arabian peninsula under the guise of fighting against al-Qaeda and specifically the operative Anwar al-Awlaki, the U.S. born cleric designated by the government and the corporate media as the senior leader of al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula.

“The U.S. military accelerated strikes against Yemen-based Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula following December’s failed attempt by the group to blow up a Detroit-bound American airliner. Since last December, the U.S. military has carried out a series of missile strikes on alleged al Qaeda operatives in Yemen. All of the strikes were approved by Washington’s ambassador to Sana’a,” the Journal reports.

The newly formed Yemeni branch of the intelligence contrivance known as al-Qaeda will continue its campaign of absurd non-bombings and will release propaganda videos featuring a raft of scary turban-donning “militants” on cue as the United States ramps up its military involvement in the Middle East, Central Asia, and Africa.

In the days ahead, as the mid-term election plays out with predictable results (as a highly controlled and orchestrated event), the manufactured terror threat that is not a terror threat will continue to dominate headlines. It is wholly irrelevant if the Republicans or Democrats control the House and Senate.

Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct (Ad)

Regardless of who wins at the game of congressional musical chairs, the effort to exploit the manufactured war on terror will continue unabated and expand its reach into new fertile territory as the globalists attempt to extend their reach and seek to accomplish order through murderous chaos.

Wednesday, October 13, 2010

Ron Paul: Dollar Collapse Will Spur 2012 Presidential Run





Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
October 13, 2010

Congressman Ron Paul has indicated that he will embark on a bid to become President in 2012 if the economic crisis worsens and leads to a dollar collapse, hinting for the first time that the Ron Paul Revolution, which was the grass roots precursor to the Tea Party, will once again be ignited as it was to such great fervor in 2008.

“Events can change quickly, and I believe sincerely we’re moving toward a much more major economic crisis. Depending on where we are on that might help me make that decision,” said Paul, who gave a speech to Tea Party enthusiasts in Richmond Virginia this past weekend.

The Congressman said that a further financial collapse was “95% likely… [because] right now the whole world is racing to beat their currencies because they think it’s going to help trade…But let me tell you, if the bombs started to fall on Iran, hold your hat, because that would be, I believe, the end of our dollar system. And we would have a real skirmish to find out what we’re going to replace this government with.”

Though Paul denied it had any connection with a White House bid, the Congressman is set to speak at the University of Iowa later this month, “An appearance many pundits have pegged as his first WH stump in the critical caucus state,” points out HotlineOnCall’s Lindsey Boerma.

Indeed, Paul will make three separate speeches in Iowa on October 29.

Political commentator and friend of Paul, New Jersey Star Ledger writer Paul Mulshine, is as certain as he can be that the Congressman will run.

“I’ve been covering him longer than any journalist I know…..I never bet more than a six-pack of beer on politics. But from Paul’s recent remarks, I’m willing to stake six cold ones on a bet that he’s running,” writes Mulshine, noting that Paul is in good physical shape for a man of 75 and is more energized than ever before.

Mulshine also points out that the field will be full of candidates who claim to be real conservatives but who in fact are liberal internationalists by the very nature of the policies they advocate – easy pickings for someone who has embraced true constitutional principles his entire life.

It looks like the field for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination is filled with candidates who espouse the essentially left-wing view that it is the role of the United States government to straighten out the politics of every country on Earth. So Paul is perfectly suited to be the sole candidate pushing the traditional conservative position against foreign entanglements.

Can you imagine the fun of pointing out real right-wing policies to a field full of liberal internationalists who don’t even know they’re liberal internationalists? I don’t think Paul can resist the opportunity to be on the debate stage listening to Newt Gingrich talk about how great Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt were. Then there’s the chance to hear Sarah Palin tell us why we should be going to war over South Ossetia or some other obscure place she knows nothing about.

And then there’s the opportunity of debating Mitt Romney on the question of how the health-care plan he pioneered in Massachusetts differs from Obamacare. Hint: It doesn’t.

Looking back to the last election may provide us with a better indication of the timing. Paul announced his 2008 campaign in January 2007, suggesting that any announcement regarding 2012 is likely to be made in early 2011.

Whether or not it will sway his decision, there’s no doubt that the vast majority of Ron Paul’s supporters are eager for the Congressman to once again hit the campaign trail. A poll conducted on one fan site which attracted over 6,000 votes came out 92% in favor of Paul running in 2012.


The End of America: Movie
9/11 Visibility Website
The Exceptional Patriot: Dr. David Ray Griffin
The Exceptional Patriot: Naomi Wolf
The Exceptional Patriot: Charlie Sheen
The Exceptional Patriot: Ed Asner
The Exceptional Patriot: Jesse Ventura
Primitive Evil Resurrected in Bedford, Pennsylvania





Top Lists

Thursday, October 07, 2010

First Amendment Ruling Destined to Kill Internet Free Speech


Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
October 6, 2010

It now appears certain the Supreme Court will rule against the First Amendment. “The justices appeared inclined to set a limit to freedom of speech when ordinary citizens are targeted with especially personal and hurtful attacks. The First Amendment says the government may not restrict free speech, but it is less clear when it also shields speakers from private lawsuits,” reports the Los Angeles Times this afternoon.

If the Court rules against the First Amendment, it will not only effect demonstrations and public displays, but also curtail freedom of speech on the internet, as one Justice pointed out today.

The case now before the Court concerns the Phelps family from Topeka, Kansas, who have picketed military funerals and proclaimed that God is punishing America and its soldiers for its tolerance of homosexuality. The case reached the Court after a Maryland father of a Marine killed in Iraq sued the Phelps family for holding up signs near his funeral that said “Thank God for IEDs” and also for posting remarks on their website that accused Albert Snyder of having raised his son “to defy the Creator” and “serve the devil.” A Maryland court awarded Snyder $5 million in damages, but the award was subsequently thrown out on the grounds it violates the First Amendment.

The Los Angeles Times may claim that the First Amendment is unclear, but as former Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black noted in in Rosenblatt v. Baer, the wording of the First Amendment makes it perfectly clear that Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech or the press. It does not say freedom of speech shall be denied and held unlawful if it is distasteful and produces an emotional response.

“An unconditional right to say what one pleases about public affairs is what I consider to be the minimum guarantee of the First Amendment,” Black opined in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan.

Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and other framers were products of the Age of Enlightenment and as such believed in the power of reason and the search for truth. They considered freedom of expression and inquiry essential to the process of debate and discovery required for the maintenance of liberty and a republic.

In the American Colonies, people were convicted of seditious libel for speaking or writing against the King of England and his agents. In response, the Founders created the First Amendment and made it the cornerstone of the Bill of Rights. In the not too distant past, the Court ruled that political speech was what the Founders had in mind when they wrote the First Amendment.

According to one libertarian thinker of the period, a citizen had the right to “say everything which his passions suggest; he may employ all his time, and all his talents… to do so, in speaking against the government matters that are false, scandalous and malicious,” and yet he should be “safe within the sanctuary of the press.” Speech was considered beyond the reach of criminal sanctions. Only “overt acts” were punishable.

Snyder v. Phelps does not concern overt acts. It focuses on “outrageous” speech that is claimed to have caused “severe emotional distress.”

In 1964 in the New York Times v. Sullivan, the Supreme Court ruled that civil liability for speech may violate the First Amendment due to the fact the threat of massive damages tends to dampen the exercise of free speech. From 1880 onward, state courts have treated constitutional free expression guarantees as constraining civil liability. No longer.

Congress provided the enemies of free speech and the First Amendment an ally when it confirmed Elena Kagan to sit on the bench. In a 1993 University of Chicago Law review article, Kagan wrote, “I take it as a given that we live in a society marred by racial and gender inequality, that certain forms of speech perpetuate and promote this inequality, and that the uncoerced disappearance of such speech would be cause for great elation.” (Emphasis added.)

As noted by the Los Angeles Times, the Supremes earlier today “sounded sympathetic” to rolling back the protections afforded by the First Amendment.

Moreover, Justice Stephen G. Breyer noted that the court’s ruling will have an impact on the internet, since it tests whether vicious personal attacks can lead to lawsuits.

If the Supremes rule that First Amendment no longer protects controversial and even emotionally hurtful speech, the internet will no longer be an open forum for the free expression of opinions and ideas.

How many bloggers and journalists in the alternative media have pockets deep enough to defend against politicians and public figures who may claim “severe emotional distress” in response to criticism?


The End of America: Movie
9/11 Visibility Website
The Exceptional Patriot: Dr. David Ray Griffin
The Exceptional Patriot: Naomi Wolf
The Exceptional Patriot: Charlie Sheen
The Exceptional Patriot: Ed Asner
The Exceptional Patriot: Jesse Ventura
Primitive Evil Resurrected in Bedford, Pennsylvania





Top Lists

Friday, October 01, 2010

Bill Gates says vaccines can help reduce world population



Mike Adams
NaturalNews
October 1, 2010

In a recent TED conference presentation, Microsoft billionaire Bill Gates, who has donated hundreds of millions of dollars to new vaccine efforts, speaks on the issue of CO2 emissions and its effects on climate change. He presents a formula for tracking CO2 emissions as follows: CO2 = P x S x E x C.

P = People
S = Services per person
E = Energy per service
C = CO2 per energy unit

Then he adds that in order to get CO2 to zero, “probably one of these numbers is going to have to get pretty close to zero.”



Following that, Bill Gates begins to describe how the first number — P (for People) — might be reduced. He says:

“The world today has 6.8 billion people… that’s headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.”

You can watch this yourself at:

http://www.naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=A…

Reducing the world population through vaccines

This statement by Bill Gates was not made with any hesitation, stuttering or other indication that it might have been a mistake. It appears to have been a deliberate, calculated part of a well developed and coherent presentation.

So what does it mean when Bill Gates says “if we do a really great job on new vaccines… we could lower [world population] by 10 or 15 percent?”

Clearly, this statement implies that vaccines are a method of population reduction. So is “health care,” which all NaturalNews readers already know to be more of a “sick care” system that actually harms more people than it helps.

Perhaps that’s the whole point of it. Given that vaccines technology help almost no one from a scientific point of view (http://www.naturalnews.com/029641_v…), it raises the question: For what purpose are vaccines being so heavily pushed in the first place?

Bill Gates seems to be saying that one of the primary purposes is to reduce the global population as a mechanism by which we can reduce CO2 emissions. Once again, watch the video yourself to hear him say it in his own words:

http://www.naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=A…

How can vaccines actually be used to reduce world population?

Let’s conduct a mental experiment on this issue. If vaccines are to be used to reduce world population, they obviously need to be accepted by the majority of the people. Otherwise the population reduction effort wouldn’t be very effective.

And in order for them to be accepted by the majority of the people, they obviously can’t just kill people outright. If everybody started dropping dead within 24 hours of receiving the flu shot, the danger of vaccines would become obvious rather quickly and the vaccines would be recalled.

Thus, if vaccines are to be used as an effective population reduction effort, there are really only three ways in which they might theoretically be “effective” from the point of view of those who wish to reduce world population:

#1) They might kill people slowly in a way that’s unnoticeable, taking effect over perhaps 10 – 30 years by accelerating degenerative diseases.

#2) They might reduce fertility and therefore dramatically lower birth rates around the world, thereby reducing the world population over successive generations. This “soft kill” method might seem more acceptable to scientists who want to see the world population fall but don’t quite have the stomach to outright kill people with conventional medicine. There is already evidence that vaccines may promote miscarriages (http://www.naturalnews.com/027512_v…).

#3) They might increase the death rate from a future pandemic. Theoretically, widespread vaccination efforts could be followed by a deliberate release of a highly virulent flu strain with a high fatality rate. This “bioweapon” approach could kill millions of people whose immune systems have been weakened by previous vaccine injections.

This is a known side effect of some vaccines, by the way. A study documenting this was published in PLoS. Read the story here: http://www.naturalnews.com/028538_s…

Here’s the study title and citation: Does Seasonal Influenza Vaccination Increase the Risk of Illness with the 2009 A/H1N1 Pandemic Virus?

Viboud C, Simonsen L (2010) Does Seasonal Influenza Vaccination Increase the Risk of Illness with the 2009 A/H1N1 Pandemic Virus? PLoS Med 7(4): e1000259. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000259

The short answer is yes, seasonal flu vaccines do cause increased susceptibility to the H1N1 pandemic virus. In other words, seasonal flu vaccines could set up the population for a “hard kill” pandemic that could wipe out a significant portion of the global population (perhaps 10 to 15 percent, as Bill Gates suggested).

Conveniently, their deaths could be blamed on the pandemic, thereby diverting blame from those who were really responsible for the plot. As yet another beneficial side effect for the global population killers, the widespread deaths could be used as a fear tool to urge more people to get vaccinated yet again, and the entire cycle could be repeated until world population was brought down to whatever manageable level was desired… all in the name of health care!

The more people around the world are vaccinated before the release of the “hard kill” pandemic virus, the more powerful the effect of this approach.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

Perhaps not coincidentally, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has funneled hundreds of millions of dollars into vaccine programs targeting people all over the world. One such program is researching the development of “sweat-triggered vaccines” that could use specially-coated nano-materials to deliver vaccines to people without using injections.

More interestingly, his foundation has also invested millions in sterilization technologies that have been called a “temporary castration” solution. (http://www.naturalnews.com/028887_v…)

It seems that the actions of the Gates foundation are entirely consistent with the formula for CO2 reduction that Bill Gates eluded to in his TED conference speech: CO2 = P x S x E x C.

By reducing birth rates (through sterilization technologies) and increasing vaccine penetration throughout the world population (by using sweat-triggered nano-vaccines), his stated goal of reducing the world population by 10 to 15 percent could be reached within just a few years.

Who will be left alive? The smart people

The interesting thing about all this is that this campaign to reduce global population through vaccines will obviously not impact people who consciously avoid vaccines. And those people, by and large, tend to be the more intelligent, capable people who actually have an improved ability to move human civilization forward with thoughtful consideration.

I can only imagine that those people designing this vaccine-induced population control measure might be sitting around a table chuckling to themselves and saying, “It’s only the stupid people that are going to be killed off anyway, so this is actually helping the future of humankind!” (Their words, not mine.)

In a weird world government kind of way, this effort might actually be based on some distorted vision of philanthropy where some of the most powerful people in the world quite literally believe the way to save humanity is to kill off as many of the gullible people as possible. Vaccines are, in effect, an “evil genius” kind of way to conduct an IQ test on the population at large: If you go get vaccinated every flu season, you’re not too bright and probably don’t engage the kind of strong mental faculties that humanity will no doubt need if it is to face a future where it is now all but obvious we are not alone in the universe.

If humanity is to save itself from its own destruction and compete as an uplifted species in our universe, killing off the least intelligent members of society (or making them infertile) may appear to the world controllers to be a perfectly reasonable approach. I disagree with that approach, but it may be precisely what they are thinking.

In any case, choosing to receive a seasonal flu shot is undoubtedly an admission that you have failed some sort of universal IQ test, whether or not this is the intention of world influencers such as Bill Gates. More importantly, it is also a betrayal of your own biology, because it indicates you don’t believe in the ability of your own immune system to protect you even from mild infections.

Perhaps the world vaccine conspirators figure that if people are willing to betray themselves anyway, it’s not much different for governments and institutions to betray them as well. In other words, if you don’t even care enough about your own health to take care of your health, why should any government care about protecting your health, either?

As you ponder this, also consider something else: The U.S. is going broke due to sick-care costs which are rising dramatically under the new federal health care reform guidelines. Can you guess the fastest and easiest way to reduce those health care costs? If you guessed, “unleash a hard-kill pandemic that takes out a significant portion of the weak or sick people” then you guessed right. Sadly, killing off those most vulnerable to sickness could save the U.S. government literally billions of dollars in sick-care expenditures. Plus, it would save Social Security yet more billions by avoiding ongoing monthly payouts. (Again, I am completely against such an approach because I value human life, but I also know we live in a world where the people in charge have little or no respect for human life and will readily sacrifice human lives to achieve their aims.)

As far as Bill Gates goes, consider his statement in the context of what we’ve discussed here: “The world today has 6.8 billion people… that’s headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.”

It suddenly seems to make a lot of sense when you understand that reducing the population reduces CO2 emissions, and using more vaccines on more people increases the death rate of the population.

My advice? Try to avoid being among those 10 to 15 percent who get culled through global vaccine programs. You will not only save your life, you’ll also pass the “universal IQ test” which determines whether you’re smart enough to know that injecting your body with chemicals and viral fragments in order to stop “seasonal flu” is a foolish endeavor.

Be healthy and wise, and you’ll survive the world depopulation effort that victimizes conventional thinkers who don’t have the intelligence to question what they’re being told to do by their own corrupt governments.


The End of America: Movie
9/11 Visibility Website
The Exceptional Patriot: Dr. David Ray Griffin
The Exceptional Patriot: Naomi Wolf
The Exceptional Patriot: Charlie Sheen
The Exceptional Patriot: Ed Asner
The Exceptional Patriot: Jesse Ventura
Primitive Evil Resurrected in Bedford, Pennsylvania





Top Lists

Monday, September 13, 2010

Ground Zero Mosque Controversy: A CIA Orchestrated Event


Kurt Nimmo
September 12, 2010

The Ground Zero mosque event was designed to reinvigorate the manufactured Global War on Manufactured Terror. Photo: David Shankbone.

Imagine my surprise when I learned that the so-called Ground Zero mosque has connections to the CIA. Mark Ames, writing for the New York Observer, spelled out the connections on Friday. Ames notes that the “right” (neocons) portray Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf as a terrorist sympathizer with ties to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. “But meanwhile, links between the group behind the controversial mosque, the CIA and U.S. military establishment have gone unacknowledged,” he writes.

Ames connects the Cordoba Initiative behind the mosque to R. Leslie Deak, a “business consultant” for Patriot Defense Group, apparently a CIA front company. One of the company’s “strategic advisers” is a former deputy director for operations at the CIA who “managed the CIA’s globally deployed personnel and nearly half of its multi-billion dollar budget” and “served as head of America’s Clandestine Service, the CIA’s operational response to the attacks of September 11, 2001.” Other consultants include a former four-star general who commanded the U.S. Special Operations Command and its effort in the manufactured Global War On Terrorism. The trio is complete with the presence of a banker.

Leslie Deak’s father was a former top intelligence commander during World War II for the OSS (the forerunner of the CIA) and was the founder of Deak-Perera, a foreign currency and gold dealer that was accused by a Presidential Commission on Organized Crime in 1984 of money laundering for Columbia drug cartels. The CIA is known for its connections to the worldwide illegal drug trade.

Mark Ames steers the whole affair safely into the false right-left paradigm. The Cordoba Initiative and the controversy surrounding it is designed to damage “moderates and progressives who actually view New York, and the nation as a whole, as a tolerant melting pot, and strengthening the position demagogues on both sides [and] it will almost certainly deal a setback to interfaith relations. It will also help to hobble the Democratic party. Which just might have been the point all along,” writes Ames.

The Ground Zero mosque has nothing to do with sabotaging moderates or Democrats (who mostly buy into the fairy tale that Muslims hate us for our freedom). Instead, the event was designed to reinvigorate the manufactured GWOT unleashed by the CIA with its spook agency spawned terror attributed to shadowy operatives who handle an array of clueless patsies like the Christmas day fizzle pants non-bomber and the Times Square barbeque grill gas tank non-bomber. It is also no mistake the controversy unfolded in the weeks before the September 11 anniversary.

Both Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood are intelligence assets. Hamas was aided directly by Israeli intelligence as a counter balance to the PLO. The Muslim Brotherhood was long ago compromised by British intelligence. “The bottom line is that the Muslim Brotherhood’s success could not have been achieved without the approval of the British ruling establishment,” writes Peter D. Goodgame. The CIA was also interested in exploiting the Brotherhood. “According to CIA agent Miles Copeland, the Americans began looking for a Muslim Billy Graham around 1955… When finding or creating a Muslim Billy Graham proved elusive, the CIA began to cooperate with the Muslim Brotherhood.”


The End of America: Movie
9/11 Visibility Website
The Exceptional Patriot: Dr. David Ray Griffin
The Exceptional Patriot: Naomi Wolf
The Exceptional Patriot: Charlie Sheen
The Exceptional Patriot: Ed Asner
The Exceptional Patriot: Jesse Ventura
Primitive Evil Resurrected in Bedford, Pennsylvania





Top Lists

Saturday, September 11, 2010

The Brother of James Earl Ray Links the CIA to the Murder of Martin L. King



The Brother of James Earl Ray Links the CIA to the Murder of Martin L. King and Details His Abuse at the Hands of the FBI
By Alex Constantine

The following letter to Barry F. Kowalski, former special counsel at the Criminal Section of the Civil Rights Division of the U. S. Department of Justice, was written by John Larry Ray, brother of James Earl Ray, on March 8, 1999. I acqured this document shortly after it was written, and am revealing some of its contents here for the first time.

The letter has not been edited for typographical and grammatical errors. It is transcribed here exactly as typed.

Joseph Paul Franklin, mentioned in the text, crippled Larry Flynt, publisher of Hustler, for life with a bullet meant to silence the publisher's investigation of the John Kennedy assassination. Franklin has never been tried for the attempted murder of Mr. Flynt, but was convicted for an unrelated homicide.
••••••
Greetings Barry F. Kowalski:

In 1998, u.s. attorney-general Janet Reno put you in charge of conducting a limited investigation into the shooting of Rev. Martin Luther King. A few months later, I made copies of confessions of James Earl Ray, and John Larry Ray to you, and told you to make information from these confessions available to the public, such information as:

• That military policeman James Earl Ray, and the OSS/CIA agents had connections to another racial shooting in Germany.

• That James Earl Ray accepted a sum of money from mobsters, and CIA agents in Illinois, and Canada to carry out some type of assignment.

• That since 1968, all the FBI directors, all the Attorney Generals, and members of Congress has buried this connection between Ray, and the CIA.

• That all the afore-mentioned FBI directors, Attorney Generals, and Congressmen carried out the following act of terrorism against John Larry Ray because he wouldn't join up with them in this Grand Conspiracy:

1) That the feds put John Larry Ray under custody for 18 years for supposedly picking a person up on a highway, who was not found guilty of robbing a bank in St. Peters, Missouri.

2) That the feds added an additional three (3) years to this sentence, because he was tardy about submitting a sample of his handwriting to the FBI.

3) That the feds ran John Larry Ray in and out of prisons, because he would not give testimony to Congress supporting their conspiracy.

4) That the feds tried to get serial-assassing Joseph Paul Franklin to give testimony that John Larry Ray was connected to the shooting of Urban-League president Vernon Jordan.

5) That the feds tried to put the SPECIAL DANGEROUS OFFENDERS ACT on the back of John Larry Ray.

6) That the feds beat on the head of John Larry Ray so much that he had to take two brain waive tests. Once at the Incarante Word hospital in St. Louis, Missouri, and once at the St. Johns hospital in Springfield, Illinois. Its believed by some doctors that such injuries can cause Diabetes.

7) That the feds withheld Diabetic medication from John Larry Ray, wich shortened his lifespan, and made a cripple out of him for life.

9) That the feds tried to put John Larry Ray in an Illinois insane asylum, because he would not go along with their Grand Conspiracy, but a sanity jury ruled, that there was nothing wrong with the sanity of John L. Ray.

10) That the feds accused,or charged John Larry Ray of committing more than 30 felonies in justifying holding him under custody for more than 25 years.

I am still waiting for you to made the afore-mentioned information available to the public. If you do not I will have to make such information available to the public. If I do not make such information available to the public, I moght wind up in solitary confinement in some asylum in the united states, or stretched out beneath a tombstone before my time.

One reason I believe that the feds are involved in assassinations is that after each investigation, they seal up their findings for 50 years, thus, the feds
investigating assassinations in the united states, would be like Jack the Ripper investigating who was carving up ladies of the night in England.

I Remain,

John Larry Ray,
Soulard City, Missouri

Friday, September 10, 2010

Barack Obama: Puppet on a String



Jurriaan Maessen
September 9, 2010

The history of Barack Obama is thoroughly submerged in CIA-connections, as Wayne Madsen and others have pointed out. But it’s important not to lose sight of the fact that the CIA — for its part — is controlled by the international bankers.

The Western World did not complain in 1933 because Hitler, though a fascist and a totalitarian, was seen, like countless American puppet dictators today, as someone who leaves the established order in place. Photo: Hugo Jaeger/Time & Life Pictures/Getty Images.

The extend to which the CIA, and the International Bankers who control the Agency, create statesmen is something Obama himself is acutely aware of. In a 1983 article for the Weekly News Magazine Sundial of Columbia University, ironically entitled Breaking the War Mentality, the then 22-year old Barack Obama wrote:

“In 1933 the German establishment thought it could use Hitler to restore a modicum of order to the confused and confusing Weimar Republic. In fact, Hitler did strengthen the German establishment, but not exactly in the way the bankers and businessmen had wanted; and now, fifty years later, it is clear who was using whom.”

The young Obama was also aware that most statesmen were just puppet-presidents, put in power by the CIA and the bankers behind it:

“Nevertheless, the Western World did not complain in 1933 because Hitler, though a fascist and a totalitarian, was seen, like countless American puppet dictators today, as someone who leaves the established order in place.”

Very insightful words by the young, intelligent Barack Obama — especially considering he would himself be selected by the Agency for the task of promoting the new world order agenda.

In a meeting of the Council on Foreign Relations on June 18, 2008, current New Mexico Governor and former democratic presidential candidate Bill Richardson has stated that Barack Obama was favored for the American presidency by a majority of bankers at the Bilderberg-meeting near Chantilly, Virginia earlier that same year. Although Richardson himself didn’t attend the meeting in 2008, the revealing statement was apparently confided to him by attendee Marie-Josée Kravis, senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, who did indeed participate in the elitist get-together in 2008.

Only ten days after Bilderberg, Richardson was invited to speak before an assembly of CFR-transnationalists about ‘better policy and politics on immigration’ in the CFR’s ‘Western Hemisphere Transnational Series’.

In response to a question by CFR-moderator Garrick Utley regarding the fact that candidate Barack Obama did not pull as much votes from the Hispanic communities as Hillary Clinton did, Richardson guessed that as long as people get to know the Illinois Senator, he’s sure to win their votes. Bill Richardson:

‘He is a minority himself with an internationalist background – let me tell you—(…) I was just talking to Marie-Josee – some of the people who attended the Bilderberg conferences. The most conservative bankers—they’re all for Obama!’

After making this statement, Richardson appears to hesitate as he stumbles:

‘I mean, I don’t know—and I think you’re seeing this nationally.’

Important to note here that it would be another 5 months before Barack Obama was actually declared winner of the presidential election. In this slip of the tong by Richardson (himself a two-time Bilderberg attendee) we are shown another glimpse of the murmurings going on around the secretive Bilderberg campfire. It also illustrates that international bankers are only interested in a presidential candidate’s political color insofar as it coincides with their globalist agenda.

So, which banking-heads were attending the 2008 Bilderberg-meeting anyway?

To name just a few:

- Robert B. Zoellick, president of The World Bank Group

- Jean-Claude Trichet, president of the European Central Bank

- Timothy Geithner, (then) President and CEO Federal Reserve Bank of New York

- Ben S. Bernanke, chairman Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System

- Frank McKenna, Deputy Chair TD Bank Financial Group

- Tom McKillop, Chairman of the Royal Bank of Scotland Group

Again: no surprises. The Bilderberg Group itself was established by the trinity: CIA, International Bankers and Teutonic Aristocratic Elite.

How exactly this came about, we can learn from Kai Bird’s The Chairman, John J. McCoy, The Making of the American Establishment. In this account we read of one of the European founders of Bilderberg (Joseph Retinger) and his efforts abroad:

“In late 1952, Retinger went to America to try the idea out on his American contacts. Among others, he saw such old friends as Averell Harriman, David Rockefeller, and Bedel Smith, then director of the CIA. After Retinger explained his proposal, Smith said, ‘Why the hell didn’t you come to me in the first place?’ He quickly referred Retinger to C. D. Jackson, who was about to become Eisenhower’s special assistant for psychological warfare. It took a while for Jackson to organize the American wing of the group, but finally, in May 1954, the first conference was held in the Hotel de Bilderberg, a secluded hotel in Holland, near the German border. Prince Bernhard, and Retinger drew up the list of invitees from the European countries, while Jackson controlled the American list.”

It should be clear to even a casual observer that the current president of the United States is unfolding an agenda that has been pushed for by international banks in conjunction with the CIA for a long time and is now accelerating at great pace.


The End of America: Movie
9/11 Visibility Website
The Exceptional Patriot: Dr. David Ray Griffin
The Exceptional Patriot: Naomi Wolf
The Exceptional Patriot: Charlie Sheen
The Exceptional Patriot: Ed Asner
The Exceptional Patriot: Jesse Ventura
Primitive Evil Resurrected in Bedford, Pennsylvania





Top Lists

Wednesday, September 08, 2010

Oliver Stone says Hitler "Enabled by Western Bankers."


BANGKOK, Thailand — Adolf Hitler was a psychopath and a monster but rose to power thanks to big business leaders and other supporters who appreciated his vow to destroy communism and control workers, Hollywood filmmaker Oliver Stone said Monday.

Stone, who is working on a 10-part documentary on the 20th century titled "The Secret History of the United States," said the German dictator was "enabled by Western bankers" and managed to "seduce" Germany's military industrial complex.

"Hitler is a monster. There is no question. I have no empathy for Hitler at all. He was a crazy psychopath," Stone told reporters in the Thai capital. "But like Frankenstein was a monster, there was a Dr. Frankenstein. He is product of his era."

Stone was in Bangkok to give a lecture to high school students on the role of film in peace-building as part of a visit organized by the Vienna-based International Peace Foundation.

He said the aim of his documentary, which two historians are helping him with, was to offer a fuller understanding of the 20th century and how some of those lessons may be relevant to President Barack Obama in 2010.

"What has America become? How can we in America not learn from Germany in the 1930s," the Oscar-winning director asked.

Earlier in the day, Stone told about 300 students that his 1991 movie "JFK," was his most controversial to date and that the United States remains in denial over the possibility that someone other than Lee Harvey Oswald could have assassinated John F. Kennedy.

Stone said exploring alternative theories over the JFK assassination remains too sensitive for those in the media or academia who "would be endangering their careers and their position."

"To this day, many key Americans in power are in total denial about this story," Stone said. "They don't even want to know about the possibility that he was killed by someone other than Lee Harvey Oswald. It is a national fairy tale."

"JFK" ridicules the Warren Commission's conclusion that Oswald acted alone and suggests a massive conspiracy.

Stone's film centred on a theory by New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison that a CIA-led mutiny killed the president and the plotters walked away unscathed. Garrison's theories went to court in 1967, but Clay Shaw, the alleged "evil genius" behind the assassination, was acquitted.

Stone said Monday he thought it was "a good thing" to revisit the JFK assassination. But he came under fire from the historians and film reviewers who contended Stone had fudged facts, invented characters and elevated speculation to truth to support his burning belief that the killing was a high-level government conspiracy.

"It's an amazing story and I did it," Stone said. "I thought I would be respected for it, and I was lambasted in the establishment press. I was called a myth-maker, a propagandist. I didn't see it coming. I thought the Kennedy murder was safe."

Stone is famous for several other movies, including the Vietnam War films "Born on the Fourth of July" and "Platoon," which won four Oscars, including best picture and best director.


The End of America: Movie
9/11 Visibility Website
The Exceptional Patriot: Dr. David Ray Griffin
The Exceptional Patriot: Naomi Wolf
The Exceptional Patriot: Charlie Sheen
The Exceptional Patriot: Ed Asner
The Exceptional Patriot: Jesse Ventura
Primitive Evil Resurrected in Bedford, Pennsylvania





Top Lists

Tuesday, September 07, 2010

Charles Manson: Global Warming Eugenicist and Prophet



Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
September 7, 2010

Charles Manson, the man who masterminded the brutal murders of nine people in the summer of 1969 in an effort to spark a race war in America, has adopted a new cause from his prison cell in California – he is a prophet for the global warming movement – sharing common ground with top academics, environmentalists and even the White House science czar in calling for large numbers of human beings to be exterminated in the name of saving the Earth.

A study of Manson’s belief system is an alarming exercise in understanding the roots of the modern day eugenicist movement, which is propagated via the notion that overpopulation is killing the planet and causing global warming.

The infamous “Manson family” were responsible for the barbaric slayings of actress Sharon Tate and her unborn baby, as well as Rosemary LaBianca and her husband Leno, murders that sent shock waves through America and marked a sudden and crashing halt to the “free love” hippy movement of the 60’s. Manson himself killed one man, Bernard Crowe, and directed his cult-like followers in the murders of eight other victims.

Manson masterminded the murders in a bid to precipitate a race war between whites and blacks which he dubbed “Helter Skelter,” a term he took from the Beatles song of the same name. Manson and his followers were arrested for the murders in October, November and December of 1969 and all received life sentences.

Preaching the same cause as James Jay Lee, the crazed eco-warrior who stormed a Discovery Channel building last week armed with guns and explosives, Manson continues to attract a loyal following from new members of his “family” who share the notorious killer’s obsession with the need to exterminate humans in order to save the Earth from global warming.

Manson, who still adorns a Nazi swastika tattoo on his forehead, did not glom on to the global warming bandwagon after seeing Al Gore’s Inconvenient Truth, the movie that gunman Lee cited as his inspiration, he was preaching about the need to kill people in order to save the polar ice caps from melting as far back as the mid-80’s.


The End of America: Movie
9/11 Visibility Website
The Exceptional Patriot: Dr. David Ray Griffin
The Exceptional Patriot: Naomi Wolf
The Exceptional Patriot: Charlie Sheen
The Exceptional Patriot: Ed Asner
The Exceptional Patriot: Jesse Ventura
Primitive Evil Resurrected in Bedford, Pennsylvania





Top Lists

FBI Warns of Possible Terrorist Response to “Burn Koran Day”



Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
September 6, 2010

Infowars.com has received a leaked copy of an internal FBI memo warning of a possible terrorist response to “International Burn A Koran Day,” an event scheduled for the ninth anniversary of the September 11 attack to be held by the Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, Florida.

Members of the Islamic group Hizbut Tahrir Indonesia hold placards during a protest in front of U.S. embassy in Jakarta September 4, 2010.

Infowars.com contacted the FBI field office in Jacksonville, Florida, listed on the bulletin and was told the agency does not comment on investigations. Read the original FBI bulletin sent to Infowars.com here.

Last year, the church distributed t-shirts reading “Islam is of the Devil.” On August 26, 2009, Fox News reported that students were sent home from Florida schools for wearing the t-shirt.

Earlier today, General David Petraeus, currently the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, said the Taliban would exploit the demonstration for propaganda purposes. “It could endanger troops and it could endanger the overall effort,” Petraeus told the Wall Street Journal. Hundreds of Afghans attended a demonstration in Kabul on Monday to protest the event to be held in Florida.

On September 5, thousands of Muslims protested the event in Indonesia. Rokhmat Labib, chairman of the Islamic group Hizbut Tahrir Indonesia, said Muslims must not remain silent when their faith is threatened. Hizbut Tahrir Indonesia is an international pan-Islamic political organization whose goal is for all Muslim countries to unify as an Islamic state. Indonesia is the world’s largest Muslin nation.

“While the FBI has no information to indicate a specific attack has been planned against the United States or US assets in response to the ‘International Burn a Koran Day’ event, the FBI assesses with high confidence that, as with past incidents perceived as acts of desecration against Islam, extremist actors will continue to threaten or attempt to harm the leaders, organizers, or attendees the event, scheduled for 6:00-9:00pm on 11 September 2010 in Gainesville, Florida. Depending on the continued national and international publicity the event receives, it may also inspire retaliatory attacks against US facilities overseas,” the unclassified document states.

The Dove World Outreach Center has posted a Facebook page announcing the event. Following the announcement, the FBI visited the Dove World Outreach Center in Florida.

According to the document, the “FBI makes this assessment with high confidence due to credible threat information from FBI human and open sources as well as the historical significance of this event type.” Media coverage of the event “will most likely have political and national security implications,” including “violent demonstrations within the United States and abroad, threats and/or acts of violence from terrorist organizations and/or lone extremist actors.”

On August 23, WOKV, a radio station in Jacksonville, Florida, reported on threats made against the Dove World Outreach Center and its pastor, Terry Jones. “One jihadist website vowed to conduct suicide bombings in Florida to avenge the Koran burning, while others predicted an increase in terrorist recruits as a result of such actions,” WOKV reported.

The FBI bulletin cites a threat posted on the al-Faloja website earlier this month. “I wish to detonate myself in this church now, out of vengeance for the word of the Almighty Allah, and I register myself here that I want to become a martyr and detonate myself in this filthiest filth, to cleanse earth of it.” According to the FBI, the comment was detected by an “online covert employee whose information has been verified.”

In July, administrators of the website warned that “enemies of Allah have stolen the account information of one of the Al-Faloja Islamic Forums administrators, and…caused havoc in the forums.” In June, an al-Faloja administrator, Abu al-Aina’a al-Khorasani, warned members of the forum of an “infiltration operation” targeting the website.

In March of 2009, ten U.S. Muslim organizations said the FBI has sent undercover agents posing as worshipers into mosques, pressured Muslims to become informants, labeled civil rights advocates as criminals and spread misinformation, according to CNN. The American Muslim Taskforce on Civil Rights and Elections said the FBI has also used agents provocateurs against Muslims.

The FBI has a long track record of using agents provocateurs against legal political organizations. The Church Committee investigation of the FBI’s illegal COINTELPRO operation revealed that federal agents have infiltrated political organizations and instigated violence since the Palmer Raids in 1919.

In October of 1994, Paul DeRienzo, Frank Morales and Chris Flash revealed FBI complicity in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. FBI Informant Edam Salem, a former Egyptian army officer and explosives expert, built the bomb used in the attack with FBI supervision. Salem attempted to replace the explosive with harmless material to thwart the plotters, but the plan was called off by the FBI, according to the New York Times.

From the Fort Dix terror case to that of the Liberty Seven in Miami and beyond, the FBI has consistently played an instrumental role in instigating and provocateuring would-be terror attacks. “The federal authorities seem none too concerned about stopping any real terrorists and are instead obsessed with manufacturing patsies, bankrolling, radicalizing and prodding rag-tag groups to attempt attacks so that the massive slush fund that is the ‘war on terror’ can be prolonged,” wrote Paul Joseph Watson following the highly suspicious Pentagon shooting earlier this year.

In fact, there is a mountain of evidence revealing the indisputable fact that the FBI, CIA, British intelligence and the Mossad are behind most if not all major terrorist attacks. From Osama bin Laden’s irrefutable connection to the CIA to 7/7 “mastermind” Haroon Rashid Aswat’s ties to British intelligence, we see a consistent pattern of government sponsored terror exploited for both domestic and foreign policy objectives. In sum, there are hundreds of incidents of government manufacturing false flag terror for political gain.

It is not clear as of this writing if the government will be involved in a possible violent response to the Dove World Outreach Center plan to burn Korans on the anniversary of September 11. It is highly suspicious that a website posting threats promising to violently retaliate against the event was the target of an alleged infiltration operation.

In the highly charged atmosphere following the so-called Ground Zero Mosque incident, any violence in Florida or elsewhere in the United States will certainly feed the government propaganda machine that incessantly cranks out warnings of Islamic terror. If terror occurs this week, it will certainly be exploited by the corporate media and the government to further the bogus war on terror, bulwark imperial designs in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan, and provide impetus to finish the police state control grid in America.