jack_black
Member
Invalid Link Removed
Top Government Insider: Bin Laden Died In 2001, 9/11 A False Flag
- Thread starter ax1
- Start date
ax1
Legend
Ron Paul: “50 foiled Terror Plots” Claim Is False
Former Congressman says NSA hearings were a total sham
Steve Watson
June 19, 2013
Former Congressman Ron Paul accused the NSA of twisting the truth to fit pre arranged talking points Tuesday, saying that claims warrantless spying on American have foiled scores of terror plots are false.
“I don’t really believe that because I think they fudged the figures. Of those 50 plots that they stopped, I think 40 were minor plots overseas, for all we know.” Paul said, referring to comments made by NSA Director Keith Alexander during a House Intelligence Committee hearing.
The president Invalid Link Removed in a speech in Berlin, Germany today, claiming “at least 50 threats have been averted” thanks to information gleaned from the domestic surveillance programs.
“They have to try to justify their existence of destroying the freedom of and the privacy of the American citizens, otherwise they’re out of work.” Paul said on the Cavuto show Tuesday.
“They stretched the point. And even these hearings today were a bit of a sham…because they had already decided what the results would be,” the former Congressman added.
“It’s sort of like the old story about you have to burn the village to save the village. They want to burn the Constitution to save the Constitution,” he said.
“And even today, [James] Cole, the Deputy Attorney General says, the Fourth Amendment doesn’t apply to this. Where did he get this brilliance to know when it applies and when it doesn’t?” Paul urged.
“If we can go to war and do all these other things and throw the constitution out the window so casually, you better be sure if you give them an inch, they’re going to take a mile and paint themselves as heroes,” Paul added.
“The one thing they don’t do is ever ask the motivation for people wanting to kill us. If we don’t ask that question we can’t stop these problems by just taking more liberties away from the American people. We’re going in the opposite way.”
“We’ve taken away the constitution, we’re supposed to be fighting to save the constitution. It’s completely turned on its head.” the former Congressman asserted.
Paul will appear on the Alex Jones show today to further discuss this issue.
—————————————————————-
Steve Watson is the London based writer and editor for Alex Jones’ Invalid Link Removed, and Invalid Link Removed. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham, and a Bachelor Of Arts Degree in Literature and Creative Writing from Nottingham Trent University.
Former Congressman says NSA hearings were a total sham
Steve Watson
June 19, 2013
Former Congressman Ron Paul accused the NSA of twisting the truth to fit pre arranged talking points Tuesday, saying that claims warrantless spying on American have foiled scores of terror plots are false.
“I don’t really believe that because I think they fudged the figures. Of those 50 plots that they stopped, I think 40 were minor plots overseas, for all we know.” Paul said, referring to comments made by NSA Director Keith Alexander during a House Intelligence Committee hearing.
The president Invalid Link Removed in a speech in Berlin, Germany today, claiming “at least 50 threats have been averted” thanks to information gleaned from the domestic surveillance programs.
“They have to try to justify their existence of destroying the freedom of and the privacy of the American citizens, otherwise they’re out of work.” Paul said on the Cavuto show Tuesday.
“They stretched the point. And even these hearings today were a bit of a sham…because they had already decided what the results would be,” the former Congressman added.
“It’s sort of like the old story about you have to burn the village to save the village. They want to burn the Constitution to save the Constitution,” he said.
“And even today, [James] Cole, the Deputy Attorney General says, the Fourth Amendment doesn’t apply to this. Where did he get this brilliance to know when it applies and when it doesn’t?” Paul urged.
“If we can go to war and do all these other things and throw the constitution out the window so casually, you better be sure if you give them an inch, they’re going to take a mile and paint themselves as heroes,” Paul added.
“The one thing they don’t do is ever ask the motivation for people wanting to kill us. If we don’t ask that question we can’t stop these problems by just taking more liberties away from the American people. We’re going in the opposite way.”
“We’ve taken away the constitution, we’re supposed to be fighting to save the constitution. It’s completely turned on its head.” the former Congressman asserted.
Paul will appear on the Alex Jones show today to further discuss this issue.
—————————————————————-
Steve Watson is the London based writer and editor for Alex Jones’ Invalid Link Removed, and Invalid Link Removed. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham, and a Bachelor Of Arts Degree in Literature and Creative Writing from Nottingham Trent University.
ax1
Legend
Evidence Indicates Michael Hastings Was Assassinated
Rolling Stone journalist made enemies in FBI, CIA
Paul Joseph Watson
June 20, 2013
Rolling Stone journalist made enemies in FBI, CIA
Paul Joseph Watson
June 20, 2013
The revelation that Rolling Stone journalist Michael Hastings was working on a story about the CIA before his death and had contacted a Wikileaks lawyer about being under investigation by the FBI hours before his car exploded into flames has bolstered increasingly valid claims that the 33-year-old was assassinated.
Invalid Link Removed
Hastings died early Tuesday morning in Hollywood when his car allegedly hit a tree at high speed. The Los Angeles Coroner’s office has not yet been able to officially identify the body as Hastings because it is so badly burned.
Skeptics of the official narrative have highlighted eyewitness accounts which state that Hastings’ Mercedes “exploded”.
Images of the vehicle appear to show more damage to the rear, around the area of the fuel tank, than the front, leading to speculation that a car bomb which ignited the fuel could have been responsible for the incident.
“No matter how you slice this particular pie, a Mercedes is not just going to explode into flames without a little assistance,” Invalid Link Removed. “Car fires in new cars happen for three main reasons — running the engine out of oil, or running the engine out of coolant, or after an absolutely huge car mangling accident, having the hot side of the battery short out against the frame before it reaches the fuse panel. And for all 3 of those normal reasons, which account for virtually all car fires in modern cars, the fire would have started in the engine compartment, progressed slowly, and scorched the hell out of the paint before ever reaching the gas tank. That clean paint is the be all tell all, Michael Hastings was murdered, and the rest is detail.”
Stone also questions why a white sheet has been draped over the vehicle in the image below.
Invalid Link Removed
The questions surrounding the precise nature of the “accident” that killed Hastings are given more weight by the fact that the journalist had made enemies within both the FBI and the CIA.
“Michael Hastings contacted WikiLeaks lawyer Jennifer Robinson just a few hours before he died, saying that the FBI was investigating him,” the official Wikileaks Twitter account Invalid Link Removed.
Hastings “had the Central Intelligence Agency in his sights” and was set to release an article exposing the agency, Invalid Link Removed.
The Obama administration and the Justice Department have openly claimed the authority to assassinate American citizens anywhere in the world if they are deemed a national security threat. A number of American citizens have already been killed as a result of this policy. Is it really that crazy to suggest that Michael Hastings was merely the latest victim of this doctrine?
The Invalid Link Removed the fact that Hastings had received multiple death threats before his demise.
Following his role in bringing down Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, Hastings was told by a McChrystal staffer, “We’ll hunt you down and kill you if we don’t like what you write.”
“Whenever I’d been reporting around groups of dudes whose job it was to kill people, one of them would usually mention that they were going to kill me,” said Hastings.
Hastings was renowned for being “only interested in writing stories someone didn’t want him to write — often his subjects,” according to Buzzflash editor Ben Smith, adding, “He knew that there are certain truths that nobody has an interest in speaking, ones that will make you both your subjects and their enemies uncomfortable. They’re stories that don’t get told because nobody in power has much of an interest in telling them.”
The fact that Hastings had made a plethora of enemies as a result of his hard-hitting investigative journalism has prompted a deluge of online comment speculating that the writer’s “car crash” was no accident.
“Hastings’ wreck might make sense on the freeway, but I doubt he’d be dumb enough to go 100 mph on Highland. He’s not some dumb college kid,” said one commenter on a local news site.
“A warning to other journalists to not dig too deep,” another Reddit user wrote. “Stick with the party line if you want a long, happy life.”
If this was an isolated incident then there wouldn’t be so many questions swirling about Hastings’ death. However, he’s certainly not the first individual to go up against the military-industrial complex and wind up in a coffin.
Other journalists who have proven to be a thorn in the side of the establishment have met the same fate, from Invalid Link Removed who was about to release damaging pre-election information about Barack Obama before he collapsed and died in strange circumstances, to Invalid Link Removed, the Pullitzer prize-winning author who exposed the CIA’s involvement in the drug trade and subsequently committed “suicide” after apparently shooting himself in the head – twice.
More recently, Ibragim Todashev, friend of accused Boston bomber Tamerlan Tsarnev, was Invalid Link Removed, who initially claimed Todashev was armed but later had to admit this was a lie. Speculation has raged that Todashev was assassinated because he had knowledge about the Boston bombings which the feds didn’t want to see the light of public scrutiny.
Despite his actions, the murder of Christopher Dorner, who was burned to death by LAPD officers while hiding inside a cabin, shows that authorities will not hesitate to resort to such methods.
It’s virtually inevitable that the true cause of Michael Hastings death will never be known and that the mainstream media will demonize anyone who questions the official narrative as a conspiracy theorist. Meanwhile, journalists and others who pose a threat to the military-industrial complex will continue to die in bizarre “accidents” that stink of foul play.
EasyEJL
Never enough
the above on the flames is an interesting point, but what tells me it was a planned explosion is the engine location. if you ram head first into a tree like that, the engine isn't going to go anywhere by itself. But the engine + transmission flew through the air and were found around 35 yards away. absolutely no way that was "natural"
ax1
Legend
Good points...
LA Times had reported that he told his close friends and associates that the FBI had been harassing him and that he was going into hiding, and Wikileaks also confirmed the FBI had Hastings under investigation.
This administration has been at an all out war with Whistleblowers and Journalists, and has issued more subpenas that any other president combined since the 1917 espionage act. This is "Change We Believe In!!!!"
ax1
Legend
My quote for the day: The most dangerous current job in America is real journalism.
Michael Hastings’ Wife Vows to “Take Down Whoever Did This”
Friend of journalist reveals colleagues were “too scared” to release panicked email
Paul Joseph Watson
June 26, 2013
Michael Hastings.
Michael Hastings’ Wife Vows to “Take Down Whoever Did This”
Friend of journalist reveals colleagues were “too scared” to release panicked email
Paul Joseph Watson
June 26, 2013
The wife of Rolling Stone journalist Michael Hastings, who was killed in what many people believe was a suspicious car crash last week, has vowed to “take down whoever did this,” according to the man who released an email in which Hastings told friends he was being harassed by the government.
Invalid Link Removed
Michael Hastings.
Staff Sergeant Joseph Biggs, who Invalid Link Removed that Hastings was working on “the biggest story yet” about the CIA before his untimely death, was responsible for releasing an email Hastings wrote 15 hours before his car crash in which the journalist stated he was “onto a big story” and needed “to go off the rada[r] for a bit.”
Biggs tweeted that the reason he released the email was because Hastings’ other friends and colleagues who received it were “too scared” to do so.
After the email was released, Hastings’ wife Elise Jordan thanked Biggs and vowed to “take down whoever did this,” Invalid Link Removed.
Biggs, who met Hastings when he was an embedded journalist in Afghanistan in 2008, added, “I won’t let a man die in vein [sic] because I’m too scared of what will happen to me. If I sent that email to Mike he wouldn’t rest, he would fight.”
In his interview with Fox News yesterday, Biggs also said that Hastings “drove like a grandma” and that it was totally out of character for him to be speeding in the early hours of the morning.
Earlier this week, former counter-terror czar under two different presidents Invalid Link Removed that the fatal crash of Hastings’ Mercedes C250 Coupe was “consistent with a car cyber attack.”
Hastings had made numerous powerful enemies as a result of his exposure of Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal in 2010, receiving several death threats in the process.
According to Hastings’ colleague Cenk Uygur, the writer was, “incredibly tense and very worried, and was concerned that the government was looking in on his material,” and also a “nervous wreck” in response to the surveillance of journalists revealed by the AP phone tapping scandal and the NSA PRISM scandal.
BuzzFeed editor Ben Smith added that Hastings had told friends and family “he was concerned that he was under investigation.”
Another close friend who wishes to remain anonymous said that Hastings was “very paranoid that he was being watched by the FBI.”
ax1
Legend
Russian Forces to Provide “Security” At US Events
FEMA signs deal with Russian Emergency Situations Ministry to “exchange experts”
Paul Joseph Watson
July 1, 2013
Russian troops. Image: Wikimedia Commons
FEMA signs deal with Russian Emergency Situations Ministry to “exchange experts”
Paul Joseph Watson
July 1, 2013
As part of a deal signed last week in Washington DC between the Russian Emergency Situations Ministry and FEMA, Russian officials will provide “security at mass events” in the United States, a scenario that won’t sit well with Americans wary of foreign assets operating on US soil.
Invalid Link Removed
Russian troops. Image: Wikimedia Commons
Invalid Link Removed by the Ministry of the Russian Federation for Civil Defense and Emergencies, US and Russian officials met on June 25 at the 17th Joint U.S.-Russia Cooperation Committee on Emergency Situations.
In addition to agreeing with FEMA to “exchange experts during joint rescue operations in major disasters,” the Russian Emergency Situations Ministry will also be providing “security at mass events” in the United States.
This suggests that events designated as Invalid Link Removed by the Department of Homeland Security, which include the Super Bowl, international summits such as the G8 and presidential inaugurations, will now rely partly on Russian authorities to provide security.
The meeting last week also agreed on the conclusion that US and Russian emergency authorities will increase their co-operation, “in order to respond efficiently to all kinds of disasters.”
The use of foreign troops or other officials in a law enforcement capacity providing “security” inside the United States is illegal under Invalid Link Removed. Capt.
William Geddes of the U.S. Army Reserve Invalid Link Removed that it is against federal law to use US troops to conduct police patrols, despite the fact that such occurrences are becoming increasingly common. The use of foreign troops is an even more clear cut violation of Posse Comitatus.
William Geddes of the U.S. Army Reserve Invalid Link Removed that it is against federal law to use US troops to conduct police patrols, despite the fact that such occurrences are becoming increasingly common. The use of foreign troops is an even more clear cut violation of Posse Comitatus.
Invalid Link Removed on how Russian troops were invited to the US as part of a Fort Carson, Colorado drill focused around anti-terror training. Aside from learning how to target terrorists in America, the Russian soldiers were also out in the local community attending a baseball game in Colorado Springs.
As Invalid Link Removed, “Rumors have circulated for years about the possibility of Invalid Link Removed on U.S. soil in the event of a widespread declaration of a national emergency. For quite some time there have been anecdotal reports to support the claim that the U.N., Russia and other nations Invalid Link Removed should some critical event befall our nation.”
“The fear should such a scenario take place has been that these soldiers would act under the banner of their own flags, ignoring the fundamental protections afforded to our citizens, leaving Americans under the jurisdiction of people who don’t speak our language or respect our fundamental rights to self defense, to be secure in our homes, and to be presumed innocent in the eyes of the law.”
Concerns about foreign troops being used on US soil have lingered ever since the release of Invalid Link Removed, which is a blueprint for the harmonization of US and Russian forces under a framework of United Nations-led global government.
Back in 2008 Invalid Link Removed that US and Canadian authorities had signed an agreement that would pave the way to using each other’s militaries on both sides of the border “during an emergency”.
Alex Jones has documented foreign troops being trained on U.S. soil to deal with “insurgents” since the late 1990′s as part of Invalid Link Removed
Back in July 2010, our reporters covered the Invalid Link Removed exercises in Chicago which involved Polish troops training alongside U.S. National Guard troops in drills focused around raiding terrorists and drug dealers.
According to SFC Mark Ballard of the Illinois National Guard, the Polish forces were “integrating into some of the civil military units that are participating in this exercise” as part of Illinois’ partnership with the Republic of Poland, a relationship based around “integrative training” and blending military and civilian forces in the event of a national emergency, as well as making this process of integration with foreign troops more “visible”.
ax1
Legend
Bolivian presidential plane forced to land in Austria over suspicions Snowden on board
Invalid Link Removed
Published time: July 02, 2013 22:39
After departing from Russia the plane of Bolivian President Evo Morales was forced to landing in Austria Wednesday morning over suspicions that NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden was on board, a claim Bolivian authorities denied.
Snowden had requested asylum from Bolivia, which has yet to answer; he also petitioned Austria but was rejected. Reports indicated the plane was hindered in navigating Western Europe as France and Portugal would not allow the La Paz-bound plane to enter their airspace.
David Choquehuanca, the Bolivian Foregin Minister, refuted the idea Snowden was on the plane, saying “we don’t know who invited this lie, but we want to denounce to the international community this injustice with the plane of President Evo Morales.”
Invalid Link Removed
DETAILS TO FOLLOW
Invalid Link Removed
Published time: July 02, 2013 22:39
After departing from Russia the plane of Bolivian President Evo Morales was forced to landing in Austria Wednesday morning over suspicions that NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden was on board, a claim Bolivian authorities denied.
Snowden had requested asylum from Bolivia, which has yet to answer; he also petitioned Austria but was rejected. Reports indicated the plane was hindered in navigating Western Europe as France and Portugal would not allow the La Paz-bound plane to enter their airspace.
David Choquehuanca, the Bolivian Foregin Minister, refuted the idea Snowden was on the plane, saying “we don’t know who invited this lie, but we want to denounce to the international community this injustice with the plane of President Evo Morales.”
Invalid Link Removed
DETAILS TO FOLLOW
ax1
Legend
Egyptian Protesters Blame Obama For Morsi Dictatorship
US media ignores anti-Obama fervor
July 3, 2013
Anti-Morsi demonstrator.
US media ignores anti-Obama fervor
July 3, 2013
Images seldom broadcast on mainstream media networks reveal a wave of anti-Obama fervor has gripped Egypt as demonstrators blame the White House for helping to install Mohamed Morsi, the Muslim Brotherhood leader who could be toppled later today.
Invalid Link Removed
Anti-Morsi demonstrator.
The protests in Egypt have largely been characterized by the media as representing an even split between pro-government Muslim Brotherhood advocates and the anti-Morsi opposition movement, despite the fact that the anti-Morsi demonstrations have been far larger.
However, one aspect of the demonstrations that has been almost completely ignored is the fact that Egyptians firmly lay the blame for Morsi’s calamitous year in office at the feet of the White House.
As the photos below illustrate, Egyptians are fully cognizant of the fact that the Obama administration played a key role in contriving the revolution that toppled former President Mubarak. Signs held by protesters include, “Wake up America, Obama backs a fascist regime in Egypt,” “Obama Supports Terrorism,” and “Obama Your Bitch is Our Dictator.” The signs also condemn the role of Anne Patterson, the US Ambassador to Egypt.
Invalid Link Removed, the 2011 revolution in Egypt was far from a grass roots uprising given that its organization was aided by establishment NGOs like Freedom House (linked to the CIA) and National Endowment for Democracy (NED).
Despite supporting Mubarak for decades, the US abandoned him and threw its support behind the Muslim Brotherhood when Invalid Link Removed and seize control of Egypt’s communications networks.
Mohamed Morsi has overseen the implementation of a dictatorship in Egypt that *****s that crafted by his autocratic predecessor. After enshrining Shariah law in the newly drafted constitution, Morsi granted himself sweeping powers to introduce any law and made himself immune from judicial oversight.
“So, is he Egypt’s dictator? At the moment, yes, on paper the most powerful Egyptian leader since the pharaoh,” Eric Trager, a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Invalid Link Removed.
Unlike in Syria, where a militant-led insurrection was hyped as a democratic uprising, the largest mass protest in human history over the last few days in Egypt has been met with deafening silence from the White House.
Invalid Link Removed, all we have heard is “crickets from the Obama administration,” with the only reference to Egypt coming from Secretary of State John Kerry, whose statement failed to address what was actually happening and instead centered on the weather conditions in Tahrir Square.
Invalid Link Removed that Morsi will “either step down or be removed from office” by the army within hours as a deadline for a political settlement expires.
H/T - Invalid Link Removed.
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
ax1
Legend
Obama Orders Fed Workers to Spy on Each Other
Jonathan S. Landay and Marisa Taylor
Invalid Link Removed
July 10, 2013
In an initiative aimed at rooting out future leakers and other security violators, President Barack Obama has ordered federal employees to report suspicious actions of their colleagues based on behavioral profiling techniques that are not scientifically proven to work, according to experts and government documents.
The techniques are a key pillar of the Insider Threat Program, an unprecedented government-wide crackdown under which millions of federal bureaucrats and contractors must watch out for “high-risk persons or behaviors” among co-workers. Those who fail to report them could face penalties, including criminal charges.
[...]
Under the program, which is being implemented with little public attention, security investigations can be launched when government employees showing “indicators of insider threat behavior” are reported by co-workers, according to previously undisclosed administration documents obtained by McClatchy.
Investigations also can be triggered when “suspicious user behavior” is detected by computer network monitoring and reported to “insider threat personnel.”
Federal employees and contractors are asked to pay particular attention to the lifestyles, attitudes and behaviors – like financial troubles, odd working hours or unexplained travel – of co-workers as a way to predict whether they might do “harm to the United States.”
Managers of special insider threat offices will have “regular, timely, and, if possible, electronic, access” to employees’ personnel, payroll, disciplinary and “personal contact” files, as well as records of their use of classified and unclassified computer networks, polygraph results, travel reports and financial disclosure forms.
Invalid Link Removed
Jonathan S. Landay and Marisa Taylor
Invalid Link Removed
July 10, 2013
In an initiative aimed at rooting out future leakers and other security violators, President Barack Obama has ordered federal employees to report suspicious actions of their colleagues based on behavioral profiling techniques that are not scientifically proven to work, according to experts and government documents.
The techniques are a key pillar of the Insider Threat Program, an unprecedented government-wide crackdown under which millions of federal bureaucrats and contractors must watch out for “high-risk persons or behaviors” among co-workers. Those who fail to report them could face penalties, including criminal charges.
[...]
Under the program, which is being implemented with little public attention, security investigations can be launched when government employees showing “indicators of insider threat behavior” are reported by co-workers, according to previously undisclosed administration documents obtained by McClatchy.
Investigations also can be triggered when “suspicious user behavior” is detected by computer network monitoring and reported to “insider threat personnel.”
Federal employees and contractors are asked to pay particular attention to the lifestyles, attitudes and behaviors – like financial troubles, odd working hours or unexplained travel – of co-workers as a way to predict whether they might do “harm to the United States.”
Managers of special insider threat offices will have “regular, timely, and, if possible, electronic, access” to employees’ personnel, payroll, disciplinary and “personal contact” files, as well as records of their use of classified and unclassified computer networks, polygraph results, travel reports and financial disclosure forms.
Invalid Link Removed
ax1
Legend
Shopping Mall Workers Spying Under Obama Spy Grid
“Insider threat” program part of an immense indoctrination campaign
Adan Salazar
July 10, 2013
Even before the government called for its legion of federal workers to Invalid Link Removed by having them observe the mannerisms of their fellow employees, the FBI had called for various businesses and vendors – including shopping mall workers – to assist in ferreting out potential “terrorist activity” by having them spy on their customers, in effect enlisting mall employees to be citizen spies for the state.
In 2007, the FBI, in conjunction with the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Assistance, began its Invalid Link Removed in which they distributed flyers to different public locations outlining what types of behaviors might constitute “Potential Indicators of Terrorist Activities.” Included in those documents were suggestions as to what nuances mall vendors may witness shoppers exhibit if said mall goers were to be planning or executing a terrorist plot.
A few of its more insane terrorist identifiers include being on the lookout for: anyone who “significantly alters appearance from visit to visit (shaving beard, changing hair color, style of dress, etc.),” people who are missing hands or fingers, or have “chemical burns, strange odors or bright colored stains on clothing,” or people seen discreetly using cameras, video recorders or “note taking… over an extended period.”
That’s right, if you’re guilty of any of these things, it’s possible you may have unknowingly been flagged as a potential terrorist by a Great American Cookie Company, Orange Julius or JC Penny employee.
Truth be told, the real goal behind the Communities Against Terrorism initiative is not to thwart terrorism. If so, FBI headquarters in Washington, D.C. might be the first place one may want to start looking according to the New York Times, who last year wrote that the Invalid Link Removed.
As PrisonPlanet.com editor Paul Joseph Watson wrote in his book “Order Out of Chaos,” governments routinely have citizens spy on one another in order to take advantage of the fear inspired by a terror threat, as this is a tried and true method of manipulating a population into waiving its rights for the sake of security.
“The constant (government) threat of terror has turned people into willing informants,” Watson wrote in his 2003 book. “The new definition of patriotism is helping the state in any way you can to stop the terrorists, even if it fundamentally violates the rights of the individual. Even a high-tech dictatorship cannot keep track of all its slaves short of putting them in camps and so the citizens need to be encouraged to spy on each other.”
The fact that shopping malls have, as of late, been so frequently designated as potential terrorist targets has led some to suspect that an American mall may be the staging ground for the next big government false flag attack.
Last year, Invalid Link Removed on how the DHS had partnered up with a few Simon-owned malls to begin promoting its See Something, Say Something snitch campaign.
And just yesterday, we featured a video sent in by a San Antonio mall-goer who said he was disturbed when he saw a Invalid Link Removed inside of the Ingram Park Mall.
Given that the FBI has expended significant effort in attempting to enlist citizen spies at malls, Invalid Link Removed, Invalid Link Removed, Invalid Link Removed, Invalid Link Removed and Invalid Link Removed, it’s not surprising to see the federal government begin telling its own workers to report suspicious actions and be on the lookout for “high-risk persons or behaviors.”
The program’s overall effectiveness in identifying actual terror threats is also minimal at best. According to Invalid Link Removed, a 2008 National Research Council report on detecting terrorists concluded, “There is no consensus in the relevant scientific community nor on the committee regarding whether any behavioral surveillance or physiological monitoring techniques are ready for use at all.”
In addition to intimidating those who wish to speak out against inter-governmental corruptness and breeding suspicion, distrust, fear and contempt among the general population, Obama’s federal worker spy grid program, along with the FBI’s enlisting of citizen spies, are all part of an immense terrorism indoctrination campaign effort meant to indefinitely prop up the war on terror.
Invalid Link Removed
“Insider threat” program part of an immense indoctrination campaign
Adan Salazar
July 10, 2013
Even before the government called for its legion of federal workers to Invalid Link Removed by having them observe the mannerisms of their fellow employees, the FBI had called for various businesses and vendors – including shopping mall workers – to assist in ferreting out potential “terrorist activity” by having them spy on their customers, in effect enlisting mall employees to be citizen spies for the state.
In 2007, the FBI, in conjunction with the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Assistance, began its Invalid Link Removed in which they distributed flyers to different public locations outlining what types of behaviors might constitute “Potential Indicators of Terrorist Activities.” Included in those documents were suggestions as to what nuances mall vendors may witness shoppers exhibit if said mall goers were to be planning or executing a terrorist plot.
A few of its more insane terrorist identifiers include being on the lookout for: anyone who “significantly alters appearance from visit to visit (shaving beard, changing hair color, style of dress, etc.),” people who are missing hands or fingers, or have “chemical burns, strange odors or bright colored stains on clothing,” or people seen discreetly using cameras, video recorders or “note taking… over an extended period.”
That’s right, if you’re guilty of any of these things, it’s possible you may have unknowingly been flagged as a potential terrorist by a Great American Cookie Company, Orange Julius or JC Penny employee.
Truth be told, the real goal behind the Communities Against Terrorism initiative is not to thwart terrorism. If so, FBI headquarters in Washington, D.C. might be the first place one may want to start looking according to the New York Times, who last year wrote that the Invalid Link Removed.
As PrisonPlanet.com editor Paul Joseph Watson wrote in his book “Order Out of Chaos,” governments routinely have citizens spy on one another in order to take advantage of the fear inspired by a terror threat, as this is a tried and true method of manipulating a population into waiving its rights for the sake of security.
“The constant (government) threat of terror has turned people into willing informants,” Watson wrote in his 2003 book. “The new definition of patriotism is helping the state in any way you can to stop the terrorists, even if it fundamentally violates the rights of the individual. Even a high-tech dictatorship cannot keep track of all its slaves short of putting them in camps and so the citizens need to be encouraged to spy on each other.”
The fact that shopping malls have, as of late, been so frequently designated as potential terrorist targets has led some to suspect that an American mall may be the staging ground for the next big government false flag attack.
Last year, Invalid Link Removed on how the DHS had partnered up with a few Simon-owned malls to begin promoting its See Something, Say Something snitch campaign.
And just yesterday, we featured a video sent in by a San Antonio mall-goer who said he was disturbed when he saw a Invalid Link Removed inside of the Ingram Park Mall.
Given that the FBI has expended significant effort in attempting to enlist citizen spies at malls, Invalid Link Removed, Invalid Link Removed, Invalid Link Removed, Invalid Link Removed and Invalid Link Removed, it’s not surprising to see the federal government begin telling its own workers to report suspicious actions and be on the lookout for “high-risk persons or behaviors.”
The program’s overall effectiveness in identifying actual terror threats is also minimal at best. According to Invalid Link Removed, a 2008 National Research Council report on detecting terrorists concluded, “There is no consensus in the relevant scientific community nor on the committee regarding whether any behavioral surveillance or physiological monitoring techniques are ready for use at all.”
In addition to intimidating those who wish to speak out against inter-governmental corruptness and breeding suspicion, distrust, fear and contempt among the general population, Obama’s federal worker spy grid program, along with the FBI’s enlisting of citizen spies, are all part of an immense terrorism indoctrination campaign effort meant to indefinitely prop up the war on terror.
Invalid Link Removed
ax1
Legend
Interesting...and I gotta be honest this is the first time I heard anything interesting at all about this garbage court case they are feeding Americans down their throat with 24/7 coverage.
The only purpose of the Zimmerman case is to keep people off whats currently important and actually does effect every-bodies lives, which is the wars, the scandals, Benghazi, the goverment intrusion's and the complete shredding of our Bill of Rights.
ax1
Legend
CIA Will Now Openly Propagandize Americans
Smith-Mundt Act “reformed” this month allowing CIA to disseminate propaganda
Kurt Nimmo
July 15, 2013
Invalid Link Removed
Operation Mockingbird, the CIA’s long term effort to control the news, has shifted into overdrive.
On July 2, a little noticed “reform” passed in January went into effect. The Invalid Link Removed, passed as part of the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act, will allow the CIA to flood America with more government propaganda.
The Smith-Mundt Act, passed as the Invalid Link Removed was taking shape in 1948, authorized the State Department to unleash a tidal wave of propaganda outside the United States while supposedly forbidding its dissemination inside the country. The law set the stage for Frank Wisner, who headed up he CIA’s covert action division in the early 1950s, to build his “mighty Wurlitzer,” described by none other than the Invalid Link Removed as “the means for orchestrating, in almost any language anywhere in the world, whatever tune the CIA was in the mood to hear.”
In the years since, the establishment media has worked hand in glove with the CIA. This cozy relationship was revealed by Frank Church and the Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities in 1975 and, a few years later, by reporter Carl Bernstein.
“Among the chief executives who helped the CIA were William Paley of CBS, Henry Luce of Time, Arthur Sulzberger of the New York Times, Barry Bingham Sr. of the Louisville Courier-Journal, and James Copley of the Copley News Service,” write Amy Goodman and David Goodman in Invalid Link RemovedInvalid Link Removed, a chapter from the book Static: Government Liars, Media Cheerleaders, and the People Who Fight Back. “The leading TV networks, including ABC and NBC, and the wire services-AP, UPI, Reuters, along with Hearst Newspapers, Scripps Howard, Newsweek, the Miami Herald, and the Saturday Evening Post all had dealings with the spy agency. The CIA’s most valuable associations were with the New York Times, CBS, and Time Inc.”
This media penetration by the CIA is not merely a baseless conspiracy theory as some might argue, but is backed up by CIA office memos released under FOIA revealing the placement of “important assets” inside every major news organization in the country. “It was not until 1982 that the Agency openly admitted that reporters on the CIA payroll have acted as case officers to agents in the field,” writes Invalid Link Removed.
“Most consumers of the corporate media were – and are – unaware of the effect that the salting of public opinion has on their own beliefs,” Constantine continues. “A network anchorman in time of national crisis is an instrument of psychological warfare in the MOCKINGBIRD media. He is a creature from the national security sector’s chamber of horrors. For this reason consumers of the corporate press have reason to examine their basic beliefs about government and life in the parallel universe of these United States.”
Despite the promise of the Smith-Mundt Act – that a firewall stands between foreign and domestic propaganda – the CIA, the Invalid Link Removed, has never honored its charter (prohibiting domestic operation) and has consistently utilized the corporate media as a propaganda machine.
Enactment of the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act underscores the fact the CIA no longer pretends to honor its charter and refrains from flooding the media with government propaganda. “The evaporation of Smith-Mundt and other provisions to safeguard U.S. citizens against government propaganda campaigns is part of a larger trend within the diplomatic and military establishment,” ace reporter Invalid Link Removed wrote in May, 2012, more than a year before his assassination.
In fact, this “larger trend” has been in effect since the imposition of the National Security Act in 1947 and the establishment of the National Security Council, the principal forum used by the financial elite and their intelligence apparatus to dictate policy to the president of the United States and the State Department.
Smith-Mundt Act “reformed” this month allowing CIA to disseminate propaganda
Kurt Nimmo
July 15, 2013
Invalid Link Removed
Operation Mockingbird, the CIA’s long term effort to control the news, has shifted into overdrive.
On July 2, a little noticed “reform” passed in January went into effect. The Invalid Link Removed, passed as part of the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act, will allow the CIA to flood America with more government propaganda.
The Smith-Mundt Act, passed as the Invalid Link Removed was taking shape in 1948, authorized the State Department to unleash a tidal wave of propaganda outside the United States while supposedly forbidding its dissemination inside the country. The law set the stage for Frank Wisner, who headed up he CIA’s covert action division in the early 1950s, to build his “mighty Wurlitzer,” described by none other than the Invalid Link Removed as “the means for orchestrating, in almost any language anywhere in the world, whatever tune the CIA was in the mood to hear.”
In the years since, the establishment media has worked hand in glove with the CIA. This cozy relationship was revealed by Frank Church and the Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities in 1975 and, a few years later, by reporter Carl Bernstein.
“Among the chief executives who helped the CIA were William Paley of CBS, Henry Luce of Time, Arthur Sulzberger of the New York Times, Barry Bingham Sr. of the Louisville Courier-Journal, and James Copley of the Copley News Service,” write Amy Goodman and David Goodman in Invalid Link RemovedInvalid Link Removed, a chapter from the book Static: Government Liars, Media Cheerleaders, and the People Who Fight Back. “The leading TV networks, including ABC and NBC, and the wire services-AP, UPI, Reuters, along with Hearst Newspapers, Scripps Howard, Newsweek, the Miami Herald, and the Saturday Evening Post all had dealings with the spy agency. The CIA’s most valuable associations were with the New York Times, CBS, and Time Inc.”
This media penetration by the CIA is not merely a baseless conspiracy theory as some might argue, but is backed up by CIA office memos released under FOIA revealing the placement of “important assets” inside every major news organization in the country. “It was not until 1982 that the Agency openly admitted that reporters on the CIA payroll have acted as case officers to agents in the field,” writes Invalid Link Removed.
“Most consumers of the corporate media were – and are – unaware of the effect that the salting of public opinion has on their own beliefs,” Constantine continues. “A network anchorman in time of national crisis is an instrument of psychological warfare in the MOCKINGBIRD media. He is a creature from the national security sector’s chamber of horrors. For this reason consumers of the corporate press have reason to examine their basic beliefs about government and life in the parallel universe of these United States.”
Despite the promise of the Smith-Mundt Act – that a firewall stands between foreign and domestic propaganda – the CIA, the Invalid Link Removed, has never honored its charter (prohibiting domestic operation) and has consistently utilized the corporate media as a propaganda machine.
Enactment of the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act underscores the fact the CIA no longer pretends to honor its charter and refrains from flooding the media with government propaganda. “The evaporation of Smith-Mundt and other provisions to safeguard U.S. citizens against government propaganda campaigns is part of a larger trend within the diplomatic and military establishment,” ace reporter Invalid Link Removed wrote in May, 2012, more than a year before his assassination.
In fact, this “larger trend” has been in effect since the imposition of the National Security Act in 1947 and the establishment of the National Security Council, the principal forum used by the financial elite and their intelligence apparatus to dictate policy to the president of the United States and the State Department.
ax1
Legend
Dzhokar Tsarnaev’s Throat Wound: Another Government Lie Bites the Dust
Kurt Nimmo
July 19, 2013
It’s another example of why you should never trust the government.
Back in April federal officialdom told us Boston bombing suspect Dzhokar Tsarnaev was shot in the throat and unable to talk. Massachusetts Invalid Link Removed was trotted out to confirm this fantasy story. He said Tsarnaev was in “serious but stable condition” and “not yet able to communicate yet.”
Then we were fed a more theatric version where the young Tsarnaev attempted to take his own life when he was supposedly trapped in a boat. “It is thought the teenager placed a gun in his mouth and pulled the trigger in a desperate bid to avoid capture and a possible death penalty,” claimed the British version of the National Enquirer, Invalid Link Removed. “Reports say the bullet passed through his throat, just missing his spinal cord, and came out the back of his neck.”
Invalid Link Removed
Photo: Massachusetts State Police
This Hollywoodesque version dovetailed nicely with the story that the evil Brothers Tsarnaev were in a running gun battle with the cops, flinging home-made Invalid Link Removed as the pair attempted to escape the long arm of the law.
Then we were told Dzhokar was being treated by Israeli doctors who “have abundant past experience treating victims of terror… because they’re from Israel.”
“Tsarnaev is in stable condition but that because of wounds to his throat, he may never be able to speak again,” Invalid Link Removed reported, feeding the fantasy.
Invalid Link Removed
Propaganda magnifique: Rolling Stone convicts Tsarnaev before his day in court.
In May, the story changed. It was said Tsarnaev didn’t have a bullet wound in his throat, but was cut. “I did see a throat injury. To me it looked more like a knife wound,” said Officer Invalid Link Removed of the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Transit Police SWAT Unit. “It wasn’t a puncture hole. It was a slice where it was spread open, possibly a piece of shrapnel from one of the explosives that they were using the night before. It didn’t look like a bullet wound to me. It looked like a cut of some kind.” Campbell was supposedly part of the team that apprehended Tsarnaev, so if anybody knew about his wounds, it would be Campbell and his fellow SWAT officers.
CNN later edited out the comment about the throat wound made by Campbell.
Now we have a photo of Tsarnaev allegedly surrendering. It was taken by a Massachusetts State Police photographer. CBS Boston reported on Thursday the photographer, Invalid Link Removed, gave the photos to the Boston Magazine because he was upset by the Rolling Stone’s recent “glamorized” cover photo of the suspected terrorist. Murphy is under investigation for releasing photos to the magazine.
Note the absence of a throat wound in the photo.
The photo underscores the fact the government lied about Tsarnaev’s throat wound, as the photo clearly shows. Is there anything else the government is lying about? Is it possible the entire event is a government contrived fiction?
Now it’s time for somebody to release the video frame capture of the Brothers Tsarnaev dropping their bomb-laden backpacks, photos we are assured exist but were never released. Is it possible this is a lie as well?
Finally, it looks like the government no longer even cares about the quality of its deception. Earlier this week, a man we are told was Dzhokar appeared in court to plead not guilty to terrorism charges. However, according to a former wrestling teammate interviewed by the Boston Globe, the man in court “didn’t look like” Tsarnaev. Moreover, the man brought into court had a thick accent and Tsarnaev does not, as a cell phone video of him interacting with a child reveals (see video below).
Kurt Nimmo
July 19, 2013
It’s another example of why you should never trust the government.
Back in April federal officialdom told us Boston bombing suspect Dzhokar Tsarnaev was shot in the throat and unable to talk. Massachusetts Invalid Link Removed was trotted out to confirm this fantasy story. He said Tsarnaev was in “serious but stable condition” and “not yet able to communicate yet.”
Then we were fed a more theatric version where the young Tsarnaev attempted to take his own life when he was supposedly trapped in a boat. “It is thought the teenager placed a gun in his mouth and pulled the trigger in a desperate bid to avoid capture and a possible death penalty,” claimed the British version of the National Enquirer, Invalid Link Removed. “Reports say the bullet passed through his throat, just missing his spinal cord, and came out the back of his neck.”
Invalid Link Removed
Photo: Massachusetts State Police
This Hollywoodesque version dovetailed nicely with the story that the evil Brothers Tsarnaev were in a running gun battle with the cops, flinging home-made Invalid Link Removed as the pair attempted to escape the long arm of the law.
Then we were told Dzhokar was being treated by Israeli doctors who “have abundant past experience treating victims of terror… because they’re from Israel.”
“Tsarnaev is in stable condition but that because of wounds to his throat, he may never be able to speak again,” Invalid Link Removed reported, feeding the fantasy.
Invalid Link Removed
Propaganda magnifique: Rolling Stone convicts Tsarnaev before his day in court.
In May, the story changed. It was said Tsarnaev didn’t have a bullet wound in his throat, but was cut. “I did see a throat injury. To me it looked more like a knife wound,” said Officer Invalid Link Removed of the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Transit Police SWAT Unit. “It wasn’t a puncture hole. It was a slice where it was spread open, possibly a piece of shrapnel from one of the explosives that they were using the night before. It didn’t look like a bullet wound to me. It looked like a cut of some kind.” Campbell was supposedly part of the team that apprehended Tsarnaev, so if anybody knew about his wounds, it would be Campbell and his fellow SWAT officers.
CNN later edited out the comment about the throat wound made by Campbell.
Now we have a photo of Tsarnaev allegedly surrendering. It was taken by a Massachusetts State Police photographer. CBS Boston reported on Thursday the photographer, Invalid Link Removed, gave the photos to the Boston Magazine because he was upset by the Rolling Stone’s recent “glamorized” cover photo of the suspected terrorist. Murphy is under investigation for releasing photos to the magazine.
Note the absence of a throat wound in the photo.
The photo underscores the fact the government lied about Tsarnaev’s throat wound, as the photo clearly shows. Is there anything else the government is lying about? Is it possible the entire event is a government contrived fiction?
Now it’s time for somebody to release the video frame capture of the Brothers Tsarnaev dropping their bomb-laden backpacks, photos we are assured exist but were never released. Is it possible this is a lie as well?
Finally, it looks like the government no longer even cares about the quality of its deception. Earlier this week, a man we are told was Dzhokar appeared in court to plead not guilty to terrorism charges. However, according to a former wrestling teammate interviewed by the Boston Globe, the man in court “didn’t look like” Tsarnaev. Moreover, the man brought into court had a thick accent and Tsarnaev does not, as a cell phone video of him interacting with a child reveals (see video below).
ax1
Legend
Above ^^^ posted 2 years ago.
This post continues the originality of my thread, that the Bin Laden assassination was staged and a massive cover up has taken place.
-------------------------------
SEAL Team 6 Families Force Congress To Investigate Mysterious Chopper Crash
Pentagon cremated soldiers bodies; claims black box washed away in flash flood
Steve Watson
Infowars.com
July 24, 2013
Led by firebrand Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), Congress is Invalid Link Removed into the mysterious helicopter crash that killed several members of the Navy SEAL team 6 in Afghanistan in 2011.
Back in May, the families of the SEALs went public with concerns that the Obama administration was at least partially responsible for the deaths of their sons.
The family members say that they still have not received satisfactory answers to their questions, and that there are still many inconsistencies and contradictions in the explanations they have been provided.
“We’re going to dive into this.” said Chaffetz, who is acting in his position as chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform subcommittee on National Security.
30 Americans were killed in the crash on August 6, 2011 when insurgents shot down a U.S. military helicopter during fighting in eastern Afghanistan, making it the largest loss of life in a single incident for the U.S. military during the war. 22 of the victims belonged to the same unit as the Navy SEALS involved in the purported Osama Bin Laden operation, just three months earlier.
US military officials have maintained that none of the individuals involved directly in the Bin Laden mission were killed in the crash. However, sources have claimed that there were at least two SEALs who died on the chopper who had been involved in the Bin Laden raid.
Some of the families feel that the Obama administration’s handling of the death of Bin Laden made retaliatory attacks against SEAL Team 6 more likely. Family members have also expressed concerns that SEALS were sent into battle “without special operations aviation and proper air support.”
Chaffetz has said that he is preparing to send questions to the Pentagon and may hold congressional hearings on the issue. He noted that the families deserve answers: “That’s why you do an investigation. I want to be as factual as I can.” he said.
Larry Klayman of Freedom Watch, who is representing some of the families told reporters “This is a scandal even greater than Benghazi.”
“There we lost four valued American lives; here we sacrificed 30 American soldiers. The big question is were these brave Americans sold out by the Afghani government as payment to the Taliban for the death of bin Laden?” Klayman added.
Klayman’s questions stem from the fact that Afghani forces accompanying the Navy SEAL servicemen on the helicopter were most likely not properly vetted, meaning that they may have disclosed classified information to the Taliban about the mission, resulting in the shoot down of the helicopter.
Pentagon documents have confirmed that immediately prior to the take off of the helicopter, seven Afghan commandos who were listed on the passenger itinerary were mysteriously replaced by other Afghan military officials.
Defense officials have confirmed that all seven names of the Afghan soldiers on the passenger list did not tally with those on board when the chopper took to the air.
The families of the SEALs have noted that their sons did not have trust in Afghan soldiers, with one quoted as saying, “They are loyal to the highest bidder.”
Charlie Strange, the father of one of the killed SEALs also pointed out “There was no eye in the sky tracking [the Chinook]. Why not?”
In addition, pre-assault fire was requested by the team, but was denied by military officials on the ground.
“My son Michael died,” Strange said. “I want to know, who made these calls?”
The Pentagon probe into the shoot down denies that the incident was an “established ambush,” instead claiming that “it was a lucky shot of a low-level fighter that happened to be living [in the area]. He heard all the activity and he happened to be in the right spot.”
Families have countered those suggestions by pointing out that leading militants took to the internet in the immediate aftermath of the attack, to boast that they had successfully ambushed SEAL Team 6.
The Pentagon has also claimed that, despite recovering all the bodies of those killed, the helicopter’s black box was washed away in a flash flood.
The Pentagon told the families that all the bodies were cremated due to the fact that they were badly burned in the crash. However, pictures have emerged that show some deceased SEALs without bad burns.
“The body I saw didn’t need to be cremated,” Rep. Chaffetz said, also noting that the DoD’s explanation regarding the helicopter’s black box is “awfully odd.”
Perhaps even more controversially, family members have also provided evidence that suggests a Muslim cleric attended the funerals of the service members and disparaged them by “damning them as infidels to Allah” during an Islamic prayer.
Refusing to answer specific questions, a Dod spokesperson stated “the operational planning and execution of this mission was consistent with previous missions” and “was thoroughly investigated … we share in the grief of all of the families who lost their loved ones. The loss of 38 U.S. and Afghan military personnel was a tragic loss during a difficult campaign.”
ax1
Legend
Me and My Obamaphones
Not on welfare or below the poverty line? Never mind — here’s your free phone.
By Jillian Kay Melchior
National Review
August 1, 2013 4:00 AM
Invalid Link Removed
Confession: You’re paying my phone bill.
In the past month, I have received three shiny new cell phones, courtesy of American taxpayers, that should never have fallen into my hands.
The Federal Communications Commission oversees the so-called Lifeline program, created in 1984 to make sure impoverished Americans had telephone service available to call their moms, bosses, and 911. In 2008, the FCC expanded the program to offer subsidized cell-phone service, and since then, the expenses of running the program have soared. In 2012, the program’s costs had risen to $2.189 billion, up from $822 million before wireless carriers were included. As of June, there were 13.8 million active Lifeline subscriptions.
To be eligible for Lifeline, the applicant is supposed to be receiving some significant government benefit — food stamps, Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income, public housing assistance, etc. But because welfare eligibility has expanded under the Obama administration, more people than ever before are qualified to receive “free” cell-phone service — part of the reason why Lifeline mobiles have become commonly known as Obamaphones. Alternatively, applicants can qualify if their household income is less than 136 percent of the federal poverty line.
But as with any federal program with too much funding, too little oversight, and perverse financial incentives, Lifeline has become infamous for rampant fraud and abuse. There have been news reports about recipients flaunting dozens of subsidized phones. And in February, the Wall Street Journal reported on an FCC audit of the top five Lifeline providers, which found that “41% of their more than six million subscribers either couldn’t demonstrate their eligibility or didn’t respond to requests for certification.”
The FCC supposedly buckled down on eligibility standards last year and established other safeguards aimed at reducing fraud. I was curious about how tough it was to get one of these phones, so last month, I hit the streets of New York. And out of respect for the law and my journalistic integrity, I did not lie to obtain a phone.
Now is the point, I suppose, where I should explain that I really, really shouldn’t have received a single phone. Despite what you hear, not all 20-something writers in the Big City are starving. Given my earnings, even if I were supporting a family of eight, my income would still rule me out. Nor do I receive any type of government benefit. By the Lifeline program’s standards, I am unambiguously ineligible.
My first task was figuring out where to register. The rule of thumb is that wherever you can sign up for food stamps, you can apply for an Obamaphone.
Representatives from SafeLink and Assurance, two of the leading New York Lifeline vendors, stand outside the food-stamp offices, paired like Mormon missionaries, young and polite and earnest. They carry electronic tablets and ask all passersby whether they’ve received their free phone “yet” — as if it were an inevitability.
They approached me for the first time outside the food-stamp office at Tenth Avenue and 216th Street, on the northern tip of Manhattan. The SafeLink vendor, a man probably in his mid 20s, asked me whether I was enrolled in any benefit programs.
“No,” I said, “but I’d certainly like to be. I’m hoping to be.” And indeed, while doing research for another story, I had gone through the motions of applying for New York City welfare, which I also don’t qualify for. I showed him my Human Resources Administration paperwork packet and the case number assigned to me. I reiterated that though I had once applied, I had never been approved for any sort of benefit.
He brought out his electronic tablet immediately to sign me up for phone service. He asked if I had an insurance card, so I pulled out my trusty Blue Cross Blue Shield. He looked at it for a second, puzzled, then asked if I had Medicaid. No, I told him, just private insurance through my work plan.
“Private insurance? What’s that?” he asked, maybe not facetiously. My BCBS card was nevertheless photographed, as well as the first page of my Human Resources Administration paperwork. He asked for my name and my home address, and that was about it. The whole process took less than five minutes, and I had to provide no documentation verifying my income level or (nonexistent) welfare status.
The SafeLink vendor then referred me to his opposite number, a rep from Assurance. She too took down my information, registering me for another Obamaphone.
Traveling to several of the welfare offices in the city, I learned this was common practice. Obamaphone reps come in twos, and both will sign you up if they can.
That’s a very questionable practice, given the Lifeline program’s rules: Each eligible household may receive only one Lifeline subsidy, and obtaining multiple subsidized phones from multiple Lifeline carriers is “a flat-out violation of our rules,” says Michelle Schaefer, an attorney-adviser from the FCC’s Telecommunications Access Policy Division, Wireline Competition Bureau.
Invalid Link Removed
Flashback: The Obamaphone lady.
ax1
Legend
Snowden’s Father Calls Out Obama On Nuremberg Crimes
July 26, 2013
President Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20500
Re: Civil Disobedience, Edward J. Snowden, and the Constitution
Dear Mr. President:
You are acutely aware that the history of liberty is a history of civil disobedience to unjust laws or practices. As Edmund Burke sermonized, “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”
Civil disobedience is not the first, but the last option. Henry David Thoreau wrote with profound restraint in Civil Disobedience: “If the injustice is part of the necessary friction of the machine of government, let it go, let it go: perchance it will wear smooth certainly the machine will wear out. If the injustice has a spring, or a pulley, or a rope, or a crank, exclusively for itself, then perhaps you may consider whether the remedy will not be worse than the evil; but if it is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law. Let your life be a counter friction to stop the machine.”
Thoreau’s moral philosophy found expression during the Nuremburg trials in which “following orders” was rejected as a defense. Indeed, military law requires disobedience to clearly illegal orders.
A dark chapter in America’s World War II history would not have been written if the then United States Attorney General had resigned rather than participate in racist concentration camps imprisoning 120,000 Japanese American citizens and resident aliens.
Civil disobedience to the Fugitive Slave Act and Jim Crow laws provoked the end of slavery and the modern civil rights revolution.
We submit that Edward J. Snowden’s disclosures of dragnet surveillance of Americans under § 215 of the Patriot Act, § 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Amendments, or otherwise were sanctioned by Thoreau’s time-honored moral philosophy and justifications for civil disobedience. Since 2005, Mr. Snowden had been employed by the intelligence community. He found himself complicit in secret, indiscriminate spying on millions of innocent citizens contrary to the spirit if not the letter of the First and Fourth Amendments and the transparency indispensable to self-government. Members of Congress entrusted with oversight remained silent or Delphic. Mr. Snowden confronted a choice between civic duty and passivity. He may have recalled the injunction of Martin Luther King, Jr.: “He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it.” Mr. Snowden chose duty. Your administration vindictively responded with a criminal complaint alleging violations of the Espionage Act.
From the commencement of your administration, your secrecy of the National Security Agency’s Orwellian surveillance programs had frustrated a national conversation over their legality, necessity, or morality. That secrecy (combined with congressional nonfeasance) provoked Edward’s disclosures, which sparked a national conversation which you have belatedly and cynically embraced. Legislation has been introduced in both the House of Representatives and Senate to curtail or terminate the NSA’s programs, and the American people are being educated to the public policy choices at hand. A commanding majority now voice concerns over the dragnet surveillance of Americans that Edward exposed and you concealed. It seems mystifying to us that you are prosecuting Edward for accomplishing what you have said urgently needed to be done!
The right to be left alone from government snooping–the most cherished right among civilized people—is the cornerstone of liberty. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson served as Chief Prosecutor at Nuremburg. He came to learn of the dynamics of the Third Reich that crushed a free society, and which have lessons for the United States today.
Writing in Brinegar v. United States, Justice Jackson elaborated:
The Fourth Amendment states: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describingthe place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
These, I protest, are not mere second-class rights but belong in the catalog of indispensable freedoms. Among deprivations of rights, none is so effective in cowing a population, crushing the spirit of the individual and putting terror in every heart. Uncontrolled search and seizure is one of the first and most effective weapons in the arsenal of every arbitrary government. And one need only briefly to have dwelt and worked among a people possessed of many admirable qualities but deprived of these rights to know that the human personality deteriorates and dignity and self-reliance
disappear where homes, persons and possessions are subject at any hour to unheralded search and seizure by the police.
We thus find your administration’s zeal to punish Mr. Snowden’s discharge of civic duty to protect democratic processes and to safeguard liberty to be unconscionable and indefensible.
We are also appalled at your administration’s scorn for due process, the rule of law, fairness, and the presumption of innocence as regards Edward.
On June 27, 2013, Mr. Fein wrote a letter to the Attorney General stating that Edward’s father was substantially convinced that he would return to the United States to confront the charges that have been lodged against him if three cornerstones of due process were guaranteed. The letter was not an ultimatum, but an invitation to discuss fair trial imperatives. The Attorney General has sneered at the overture with studied silence.
We thus suspect your administration wishes to avoid a trial because of constitutional doubts about application of the Espionage Act in these circumstances, and obligations to disclose to the public potentially embarrassing classified information under the Classified Information Procedures Act.
Your decision to force down a civilian airliner carrying Bolivian President Eva Morales in hopes of kidnapping Edward also does not inspire confidence that you are committed to providing him a fair trial. Neither does your refusal to remind the American people and prominent Democrats and Republicans in the House and Senate like House Speaker John Boehner, Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, Congresswoman Michele Bachmann,and Senator Dianne Feinstein that Edward enjoys a presumption of innocence. He should not be convicted before trial. Yet Speaker Boehner has denounced Edward as a “traitor.”
Ms. Pelosi has pontificated that Edward “did violate the law in terms of releasing those documents.” Ms. Bachmann has pronounced that, “This was not the act of a patriot; this was an act of a traitor.” And Ms. Feinstein has decreed that Edward was guilty of “treason,” which is defined in Article III of the Constitution as “levying war” against the United States, “or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.”
You have let those quadruple affronts to due process pass unrebuked, while you have disparaged Edward as a “hacker” to cast aspersion on his motivations and talents. Have you forgotten the Supreme Court’s gospel in Berger v. United States that the interests of the government “in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done?”
We also find reprehensible your administration’s Espionage Act prosecution of Edward for disclosures indistinguishable from those which routinely find their way into the public domain via your high level appointees for partisan political advantage. Classified details of your predator drone protocols, for instance, were shared with the New York Times with impunity to bolster your national security credentials. Justice Jackson observed in Railway Express Agency, Inc. v. New York: “The framers of the Constitution knew, and we should not forget today, that there is no more effective practical guaranty against arbitrary and unreasonable government than to require that the principles of law which officials would impose upon a minority must be imposed generally.”
In light of the circumstances amplified above, we urge you to order the Attorney General to move to dismiss the outstanding criminal complaint against Edward, and to support legislation to remedy the NSA surveillance abuses he revealed. Such presidential directives would mark your finest constitutional and moral hour.
Sincerely,
Bruce Fein
Counsel for Lon Snowden
Lon Snowden
July 26, 2013
President Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20500
Re: Civil Disobedience, Edward J. Snowden, and the Constitution
Dear Mr. President:
You are acutely aware that the history of liberty is a history of civil disobedience to unjust laws or practices. As Edmund Burke sermonized, “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”
Civil disobedience is not the first, but the last option. Henry David Thoreau wrote with profound restraint in Civil Disobedience: “If the injustice is part of the necessary friction of the machine of government, let it go, let it go: perchance it will wear smooth certainly the machine will wear out. If the injustice has a spring, or a pulley, or a rope, or a crank, exclusively for itself, then perhaps you may consider whether the remedy will not be worse than the evil; but if it is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law. Let your life be a counter friction to stop the machine.”
Thoreau’s moral philosophy found expression during the Nuremburg trials in which “following orders” was rejected as a defense. Indeed, military law requires disobedience to clearly illegal orders.
A dark chapter in America’s World War II history would not have been written if the then United States Attorney General had resigned rather than participate in racist concentration camps imprisoning 120,000 Japanese American citizens and resident aliens.
Civil disobedience to the Fugitive Slave Act and Jim Crow laws provoked the end of slavery and the modern civil rights revolution.
We submit that Edward J. Snowden’s disclosures of dragnet surveillance of Americans under § 215 of the Patriot Act, § 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Amendments, or otherwise were sanctioned by Thoreau’s time-honored moral philosophy and justifications for civil disobedience. Since 2005, Mr. Snowden had been employed by the intelligence community. He found himself complicit in secret, indiscriminate spying on millions of innocent citizens contrary to the spirit if not the letter of the First and Fourth Amendments and the transparency indispensable to self-government. Members of Congress entrusted with oversight remained silent or Delphic. Mr. Snowden confronted a choice between civic duty and passivity. He may have recalled the injunction of Martin Luther King, Jr.: “He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it.” Mr. Snowden chose duty. Your administration vindictively responded with a criminal complaint alleging violations of the Espionage Act.
From the commencement of your administration, your secrecy of the National Security Agency’s Orwellian surveillance programs had frustrated a national conversation over their legality, necessity, or morality. That secrecy (combined with congressional nonfeasance) provoked Edward’s disclosures, which sparked a national conversation which you have belatedly and cynically embraced. Legislation has been introduced in both the House of Representatives and Senate to curtail or terminate the NSA’s programs, and the American people are being educated to the public policy choices at hand. A commanding majority now voice concerns over the dragnet surveillance of Americans that Edward exposed and you concealed. It seems mystifying to us that you are prosecuting Edward for accomplishing what you have said urgently needed to be done!
The right to be left alone from government snooping–the most cherished right among civilized people—is the cornerstone of liberty. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson served as Chief Prosecutor at Nuremburg. He came to learn of the dynamics of the Third Reich that crushed a free society, and which have lessons for the United States today.
Writing in Brinegar v. United States, Justice Jackson elaborated:
The Fourth Amendment states: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describingthe place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
These, I protest, are not mere second-class rights but belong in the catalog of indispensable freedoms. Among deprivations of rights, none is so effective in cowing a population, crushing the spirit of the individual and putting terror in every heart. Uncontrolled search and seizure is one of the first and most effective weapons in the arsenal of every arbitrary government. And one need only briefly to have dwelt and worked among a people possessed of many admirable qualities but deprived of these rights to know that the human personality deteriorates and dignity and self-reliance
disappear where homes, persons and possessions are subject at any hour to unheralded search and seizure by the police.
We thus find your administration’s zeal to punish Mr. Snowden’s discharge of civic duty to protect democratic processes and to safeguard liberty to be unconscionable and indefensible.
We are also appalled at your administration’s scorn for due process, the rule of law, fairness, and the presumption of innocence as regards Edward.
On June 27, 2013, Mr. Fein wrote a letter to the Attorney General stating that Edward’s father was substantially convinced that he would return to the United States to confront the charges that have been lodged against him if three cornerstones of due process were guaranteed. The letter was not an ultimatum, but an invitation to discuss fair trial imperatives. The Attorney General has sneered at the overture with studied silence.
We thus suspect your administration wishes to avoid a trial because of constitutional doubts about application of the Espionage Act in these circumstances, and obligations to disclose to the public potentially embarrassing classified information under the Classified Information Procedures Act.
Your decision to force down a civilian airliner carrying Bolivian President Eva Morales in hopes of kidnapping Edward also does not inspire confidence that you are committed to providing him a fair trial. Neither does your refusal to remind the American people and prominent Democrats and Republicans in the House and Senate like House Speaker John Boehner, Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, Congresswoman Michele Bachmann,and Senator Dianne Feinstein that Edward enjoys a presumption of innocence. He should not be convicted before trial. Yet Speaker Boehner has denounced Edward as a “traitor.”
Ms. Pelosi has pontificated that Edward “did violate the law in terms of releasing those documents.” Ms. Bachmann has pronounced that, “This was not the act of a patriot; this was an act of a traitor.” And Ms. Feinstein has decreed that Edward was guilty of “treason,” which is defined in Article III of the Constitution as “levying war” against the United States, “or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.”
You have let those quadruple affronts to due process pass unrebuked, while you have disparaged Edward as a “hacker” to cast aspersion on his motivations and talents. Have you forgotten the Supreme Court’s gospel in Berger v. United States that the interests of the government “in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done?”
We also find reprehensible your administration’s Espionage Act prosecution of Edward for disclosures indistinguishable from those which routinely find their way into the public domain via your high level appointees for partisan political advantage. Classified details of your predator drone protocols, for instance, were shared with the New York Times with impunity to bolster your national security credentials. Justice Jackson observed in Railway Express Agency, Inc. v. New York: “The framers of the Constitution knew, and we should not forget today, that there is no more effective practical guaranty against arbitrary and unreasonable government than to require that the principles of law which officials would impose upon a minority must be imposed generally.”
In light of the circumstances amplified above, we urge you to order the Attorney General to move to dismiss the outstanding criminal complaint against Edward, and to support legislation to remedy the NSA surveillance abuses he revealed. Such presidential directives would mark your finest constitutional and moral hour.
Sincerely,
Bruce Fein
Counsel for Lon Snowden
Lon Snowden
ax1
Legend
Ron Paul: Why Won’t They Tell Us the Truth About NSA Spying?
Ron Paul
August 5, 2013
***Audio plus transcript***
In 2001, the Patriot Act opened the door to US government monitoring of Americans without a warrant.
It was unconstitutional, but most in Congress over my strong objection were so determined to do something after the attacks of 9/11 that they did not seem to give it too much thought.
Civil liberties groups were concerned, and some of us in Congress warned about giving up our liberties even in the post-9/11 panic.
But at the time most Americans did not seem too worried about the intrusion.
This complacency has suddenly shifted given recent revelations of the extent of government spying on Americans.
Politicians and bureaucrats are faced with serious backlash from Americans outraged that their most personal communications are intercepted and stored.
They had been told that only the terrorists would be monitored.
In response to this anger, defenders of the program have time and again resorted to spreading lies and distortions.
But these untruths are now being exposed very quickly.
In a Senate hearing this March, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told Senator Ron Wyden that the NSA did not collect phone records of millions of Americans.
This was just three months before the revelations of an NSA leaker made it clear that Clapper was not telling the truth.
Pressed on his false testimony before Congress, Clapper apologized for giving an “erroneous” answer but claimed it was just because he “simply didn’t think of Section 215 of the Patriot Act.”
Wow.
As the story broke in June of the extent of warrantless NSA spying against Americans, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers assured us that the project was a strictly limited and not invasive.
He described it as a “lockbox with only phone numbers, no names, no addresses in it, we’ve used it sparingly, it is absolutely overseen by the legislature, the judicial branch and the executive branch, has lots of protections built in…”
But we soon discovered that also was not true either.
We learned in another Guardian newspaper article last week that the top secret “X-Keyscore” program allows even low-level analysts to “search with no prior authorization through vast databases containing emails, online chats and the browsing histories of millions of individuals.”
The keys to Rogers’ “lockbox” seem to have been handed out to everyone but the janitors!
As Chairman of the Committee that is supposed to be most in the loop on these matters, it seems either the Intelligence Community misled him about their programs or he misled the rest of us.
It sure would be nice to know which one it is.
Likewise, Rep. Rogers and many other defenders of the NSA spying program promised us that this dragnet scooping up the personal electronic communications of millions of Americans had already stopped “dozens” of terrorist plots against the United States.
In June, NSA director General Keith Alexander claimed that the just-disclosed bulk collection of Americans’ phone and other electronic records had “foiled 50 terror plots.”
Opponents of the program were to be charged with being unconcerned with our security.
But none of it was true.
The Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday heard dramatic testimony from NSA deputy director John C. Inglis.
According to the Guardian:
“The NSA has previously claimed that 54 terrorist plots had been disrupted ‘over the lifetime’ of the bulk phone records collection and the separate program collecting the internet habits and communications of people believed to be non-Americans. On Wednesday, Inglis said that at most one plot might have been disrupted by the bulk phone records collection alone.”
From dozens to “at most one”?
Supporters of these programs are now on the defensive, with several competing pieces of legislation in the House and Senate seeking to rein in an administration and intelligence apparatus that is clearly out of control.
This is to be commended.
What is even more important, though, is for more and more and more Americans to educate themselves about our precious liberties and to demand that their government abide by the Constitution.
We do not have to accept being lied to – or spied on — by our government.
Former Congressman Ron Paul’s article first appeared at the-free-foundation.org, the temporary home for his weekly column until his personal web page is up and running.
This article was posted: Monday, August 5, 2013 at 2:10 pm
Ron Paul
August 5, 2013
***Audio plus transcript***
In 2001, the Patriot Act opened the door to US government monitoring of Americans without a warrant.
It was unconstitutional, but most in Congress over my strong objection were so determined to do something after the attacks of 9/11 that they did not seem to give it too much thought.
Civil liberties groups were concerned, and some of us in Congress warned about giving up our liberties even in the post-9/11 panic.
But at the time most Americans did not seem too worried about the intrusion.
This complacency has suddenly shifted given recent revelations of the extent of government spying on Americans.
Politicians and bureaucrats are faced with serious backlash from Americans outraged that their most personal communications are intercepted and stored.
They had been told that only the terrorists would be monitored.
In response to this anger, defenders of the program have time and again resorted to spreading lies and distortions.
But these untruths are now being exposed very quickly.
In a Senate hearing this March, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told Senator Ron Wyden that the NSA did not collect phone records of millions of Americans.
This was just three months before the revelations of an NSA leaker made it clear that Clapper was not telling the truth.
Pressed on his false testimony before Congress, Clapper apologized for giving an “erroneous” answer but claimed it was just because he “simply didn’t think of Section 215 of the Patriot Act.”
Wow.
As the story broke in June of the extent of warrantless NSA spying against Americans, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers assured us that the project was a strictly limited and not invasive.
He described it as a “lockbox with only phone numbers, no names, no addresses in it, we’ve used it sparingly, it is absolutely overseen by the legislature, the judicial branch and the executive branch, has lots of protections built in…”
But we soon discovered that also was not true either.
We learned in another Guardian newspaper article last week that the top secret “X-Keyscore” program allows even low-level analysts to “search with no prior authorization through vast databases containing emails, online chats and the browsing histories of millions of individuals.”
The keys to Rogers’ “lockbox” seem to have been handed out to everyone but the janitors!
As Chairman of the Committee that is supposed to be most in the loop on these matters, it seems either the Intelligence Community misled him about their programs or he misled the rest of us.
It sure would be nice to know which one it is.
Likewise, Rep. Rogers and many other defenders of the NSA spying program promised us that this dragnet scooping up the personal electronic communications of millions of Americans had already stopped “dozens” of terrorist plots against the United States.
In June, NSA director General Keith Alexander claimed that the just-disclosed bulk collection of Americans’ phone and other electronic records had “foiled 50 terror plots.”
Opponents of the program were to be charged with being unconcerned with our security.
But none of it was true.
The Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday heard dramatic testimony from NSA deputy director John C. Inglis.
According to the Guardian:
“The NSA has previously claimed that 54 terrorist plots had been disrupted ‘over the lifetime’ of the bulk phone records collection and the separate program collecting the internet habits and communications of people believed to be non-Americans. On Wednesday, Inglis said that at most one plot might have been disrupted by the bulk phone records collection alone.”
From dozens to “at most one”?
Supporters of these programs are now on the defensive, with several competing pieces of legislation in the House and Senate seeking to rein in an administration and intelligence apparatus that is clearly out of control.
This is to be commended.
What is even more important, though, is for more and more and more Americans to educate themselves about our precious liberties and to demand that their government abide by the Constitution.
We do not have to accept being lied to – or spied on — by our government.
Former Congressman Ron Paul’s article first appeared at the-free-foundation.org, the temporary home for his weekly column until his personal web page is up and running.
This article was posted: Monday, August 5, 2013 at 2:10 pm
ax1
Legend
Feds Visited Michael Hastings’ House Day Before His Death
Agents were pursuing Rolling Stone journalist prior to suspicious crash
Paul Joseph Watson
August 6, 2013
Image: Michael Hastings
Agents were pursuing Rolling Stone journalist prior to suspicious crash
Paul Joseph Watson
August 6, 2013
Rolling Stone journalist Michael Hastings, who was killed in a suspicious car crash after complaining that he was being harassed by the FBI, had his home visited by agents from an unnamed federal agency the day before his death, a close friend of Hastings told Infowars.
Invalid Link Removed
Image: Michael Hastings
While it’s known that Hastings had warned others, Invalid Link Removed, that the FBI was on his case, the fact that feds visited the home of the controversial journalist almost immediately prior to his untimely death is yet another facet to a story which has thrown up numerous questions about the circumstances surrounding the car crash that killed Hastings in the Hancock Park neighborhood of Los Angeles on June 18.
Through speaking to close friends of Hastings, Infowars has also gathered other astounding revelations about the circumstances surrounding his death that will be released in due course if those individuals are comfortable in going public.
Several of Hastings’ friends and colleagues were reticent to go public with the fact that the journalist had Invalid Link Removedstating he was “onto a big story” and needed “to go off the rada[r] for a bit.”
Yesterday, Hastings’ wife Elise Jordan Invalid Link Removed to express the view that her husband’s death was a “tragic accident,” Invalid Link Removed whoever was responsible.
The LAPD’s assertion that no foul play was involved in the death of Hastings has not satisfied journalists who are being stonewalled by both police and federal agencies.
Last week, investigative journalists Jason Leopold and Ryan Shapiro Invalid Link Removed after the agency’s refusal to respond to a Freedom of Information Act request which sought details on the death of the journalist.
“By suing the FBI for failure to comply with the Freedom of Information Act, [we] hope to obtain records pertaining both to the unusual circumstances of Michael Hastings’s death and to the broader issue of FBI surveillance of journalists and other critics of American national security policy,” Shapiro said.
Invalid Link Removed which captures the crash of Hastings’ Mercedes shows three explosions before the vehicle comes to a rest, fueling speculation that some kind of incendiary device could have triggered the blasts. In at least Invalid Link Removed, witnesses reported loud explosions accompanying the crash.
Speculation has also centered around whether Hastings’ Mercedes was remotely hijacked, a technology which Invalid Link Removed is a fairly straightforward method of taking control of a vehicle. Former counter-terror czar Richard Clarke remarked that the crash involving Hastings was Invalid Link Removed
Hastings had made innumerable enemies in high places as a result of his controversial journalism and routinely received death threats. According to his friend Sgt. Joe Biggs, the journalist was working on Invalid Link Removed before his death.
MANotaur
Well-known member
Hes a prince hall mason not a freemason-
this can be seen by the colors of his robes and fez....
prince hall masons are NOT the same as F&A masons- they are a seperatist group that claim to be part of the same organization.
This is noted throughout history and is evident in the way they were formed- also theyre teachings and discussions and values as a group and at their meetings are not in tandem with the teachings of F&A Masons
ax1
Legend
Thats interesting,
So are they just like "wanabee's?" Are they a serious influential group?
MANotaur
Well-known member
I guess you can call them wannabes...
Prince Hall was an african that came over to america in the 18th century if i remeber right. He was never a slave but was denied admitance into the masons so he formed his own sepretist group and recruited only blacks. He felt he was denied entrance to the fraternity because of his race.
They have a completely separate charter from f&a masons. Theyre signs and tokens are not the same and do not follow the same laws and bi-laws of freemasons.
They have far more influence and power throughout the black community. Outside of that not so much. Their network is far more limited and not nearly as deep as that of the true masonic brotherhood.
D3platinum
Member
So either way they are still a force, even if not within the same "FA" but within the black community. Aren't they then sort of like the shriners or something? Even still, for example as Jay Z has shown in both subtle and not subtle form through lyric and mannerisms he does and elsewhere, he's an influential true FA right? Why would he be hawking it if he wasn't but that's not important it's his influence and the power that guy has.
MANotaur
Well-known member
I dont know about jay-z...i dont listen to his music nor could i care if he is or not.
Shriners are a completely different group but thwy are affiliated with the masons
D3platinum
Member
Seems like a proxy puppet they can control, through his mannerisms, there were lots of articles that looked beyond the lyrics and messages and what he was using in his vids and what not. lots of it in vigilantcitizen .com or something, also looked at rhianna, but the big point is that they are affiliated or have shown affiliation in one way or another, unlike tupac who spoke about it but not in favor of, but against it (correct me if Im wrong).
carpee
Well-known member
you're correct.
if you watch music videos of jay Z, Justin timberlake, Rihanna, etc.. there are too many coincidences.
the covering of one eye (look at the newest Justin timberlake album cover) , the use of baphomet, triangles/all seeing eyes, etc.
why have the past few Super Bowl half time performances used blatant occult symbolism as well.
maybe someone in the industry reads the conspiracy sites and just wants to mess with people....but I don't know
D3platinum
Member
Well that would be like asking what came first the chicken or the egg, and ofc if it's a coincidence that they are all in a high position of power in the media, specifically an arm of the media that promotes and desensitizes people into .. idk I guess the big goal is to have people not so much talk about it, but accept it, which is the REAL agenda. Let's face it why would they would high rank pop-culture be in the business of talking about it if the goal was to have people merely talk about it? Sure it'd be nice for conspiracy types, but that's not the real goal, it's having people accept it in their own faces. But what I also believe it's to show "they" are in all-places, and in theory proves that they in fact do exist, and that it's far more elaborate than people may want to believe, because let's also look at this way, even if music in itself is benevolent, if people with power can manipulate an artist to "conform" to the concepts then it means it's about using them as a vehicle to promote the concepts to the average person and bring it to the masses.
But even with the talk about a power structure, like has been said often, if you believe it enough, I guess you an make it real.. whatever they want to believe all adds to power--it's the common denominator here.
ax1
Legend
All these celebrities and stars all probably (well, Im just theorizing here to be honest) are manipulated by the hierarchy of the power structures. They might think they are in, but they are really bought out or deceived on being "in," in some way or another in order to promote the agenda where its most influential in society.
The way for the power structure gets its grip through society is to become Hollywood. Reasoning the Oligarch Royal F'n Family are treated as celebrities worldwide for example, or even Barry Soetoro (Obama) in with Hollywood, Jay-Z, other music stars, athletes and sports events.
MANotaur
Well-known member
Are ypu confusing masons w/ the illuminati??
carpee
Well-known member
I wasn't talking about either, strictly.
more that whoever is running the show is using the same occult symbols across the board.
MANotaur
Well-known member
I dont think that either one readily are using occult symbols- at least not the ones used by the masons.
the masons are a religous group that have there roots set in the old testament as the fraternity of men who first built the temple of solomon-the freemasons can trace their lineage back directly all the way to these men in that day.
the illuminati came about in the 1700s i believe and are the "enlightened ones" (im sure you knew that already.) Theyre purpose in life is to dispell and disprove all relgion and the existance of any higher being through science. They have further expanded their ploys to control mankind and the globe through the power and scope of science as well.This is why so many people believe that the illuminati are the driving force behind ploys such as global warming and bio-terrorism.
these stark differences are why the masons and illuminati are natural enemies. the masons just happen to be in the public eye while no member of the illuminati would admit to being in the group.
carpee
Well-known member
this is correct, but I think it goes farther (as far as illuminati)
masons have two different lodges. white and blue.
white is "illuminated" whereas blue is the highly traditional Old Testament based fraternity.
the illuminati had to infiltrate every position that had any moral/political/authoritative power...local and on the grand level.
"illuminated" meaning all-knowing, enlightened...and they worship Lucifer who they think is the true god of this world.
thus, the occult symbolism.
at least, that's as far as I understand it to be.
D3platinum
Member
Both work synergistically. I remember this one video I think it was actually the guy that wrote the book where he posted the pyramid of power of the 'nati. Had a germanic sounding name, he was part of it and then got out of it. Wish I could find it but you can search it out yourself, he basically said when he reached the 33rd degree there was nothing in terms of the message that was out of the world other than every level, and this is important and relevant to this discussion, is basically admitting they are the same thing , although work on different things.. and in the freemason ranks all he said was when they advanced ranks, they had to say "more light" = which is a metaphor so, in real world terms, both are the same thing, although one =freemasons (i realize they have longer history) the illuminati's existence are "new",, but if they are so new and still hold enough power, it's just power begetting power.
I have heard these two "brasses" and a division of both though. Not that they arent interrelated it's just that they are so related that it really doesnt matter at the end of the day. Too many examples to show where both worked to each other's advantage to advance whatever agenda it was at the time, socially --and you have media, political level, business-- by owning conglomerates that do 1a instead of 1a 1b.. you know what Im saying?
I have heard these two "brasses" and a division of both though. Not that they arent interrelated it's just that they are so related that it really doesnt matter at the end of the day. Too many examples to show where both worked to each other's advantage to advance whatever agenda it was at the time, socially --and you have media, political level, business-- by owning conglomerates that do 1a instead of 1a 1b.. you know what Im saying?
ax1
Legend
How about if Obama wants to raise taxes on cell phones, lets end the Obamaphone program and fund his agenda that way instead of using more tricks to raise our taxes!!
Obama celling U$ out: prez wants another phone tax
By GEOFF EARLE
New York Post
Posted: 1:37 AM, August 15, 2013
WASHINGTON — That’s one way to “cell” a fee hike.
Unwilling to ask Congress for extra funds to pay for high-speed Internet connections in schools, President Obama is instead looking to tack yet another charge on cellphones through the Federal Communications Commission.
The new program, called ConnectED, would expand an existing school-wiring effort and cost each cellphone user about $5 a year, said White House officials.
In New York City, the ubiquitous mobile devices already carry 10 separate city, state and federal fees and charges — and that doesn’t include sales taxes.
Obama is relying on the fee hike to avoid dealing with a Congress that White House deputy press secretary Josh Earnest yesterday described as “dysfunctional.”
“You would think that connecting schools to the information superhighway would be a pretty noncontroversial topic,” Earnest told reporters in Martha’s Vineyard, where the first family is on vacation.
“Unfortunately, we haven’t seen a lot of action in Congress, so the president has advocated an administrative, unilateral action to get this done.”
Administration officials said the added fee would sunset after three years after generating about $6 billion.
But critics worry it would continue forever.
According to an FCC survey, half the nation’s schools reported slower Internet connections than the average home.
Pressed on the program yesterday, Earnest denied the program was an “end run” around Congress.
“This is a program that’s already in place. They just need to make a decision about whether or not they want to update this program so they can wire schools to the Internet. The president thinks that’s a no-brainer,” he said.
Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), who chairs the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.) slammed the “endless expansion of the program at the expense of rate payers.”
The initial White House fact sheet on the program didn’t mention anything about a fee hike, although the Washington Post reported on it.
The fact sheet stated that the program will connect 99 percent of American schools to the “digital age” and that the president “is calling on the FCC to modernize and leverage the existing E-rate program.”
The independent FCC currently has only three members, two of whom were appointed by Democrats.
Invalid Link Removed
ax1
Legend
Video Shows Fake Muslim Brotherhood “Protesters” Staging Deaths & Injuries
August 17, 2013
A video shows Muslim Brotherhood protesters posing for a staged photo-op in which deaths and injuries are hoaxed.
This is not to ignore the fact that many people have been killed by the Egyptian military junta.
August 17, 2013
A video shows Muslim Brotherhood protesters posing for a staged photo-op in which deaths and injuries are hoaxed.
This is not to ignore the fact that many people have been killed by the Egyptian military junta.
ax1
Legend
Why The 2,776 NSA Violations Are No Big Deal
Ron Paul
Ron Paul Institute
August 19, 2013
(Below is just a full transcript of Ron Paul's weekly address above)
Thanks to more documents leaked by Edward Snowden, this time to the Washington Post, we learned last week that a secret May 2012 internal audit by the NSA revealed 2,776 incidents of “unauthorized” collection of information on American citizens over the previous 12 months. They are routinely breaking their own rules and covering it up.
The Post article quotes an NSA spokesman assuring the paper that the NSA attempts to identify such problems “at the earliest possible moment.” But what happened to all those communications intercepted improperly in the meantime? The answer is, they were logged and stored anyway.
We also learned that the NSA routinely intercepts information from Americans while actually targeting foreigners, and that this is not even considered a violation. These intercepts are not deleted once discovered, even though they violate the government’s own standards. As the article reports, “once added to its databases, absent other restrictions, the communications of Americans may be searched freely.”
The Post article quotes an NSA official explaining that the thousands of unauthorized communications intercepts yearly are relatively insignificant. “You can look at it as a percentage of our total activity that occurs each day. You look at a number in absolute terms that looks big, and when you look at it in relative terms, it looks a little different.”
So although the numbers of Americans who have had their information intercepted in violation of NSA’s own rules seems large, it is actually miniscule compared to the huge volume of our communications they intercept in total!
Though it made for a sensational headline last week, the fact is these 2,776 “violations” over the course of one year are completely irrelevant. The millions and millions of “authorized” intercepts of our communications are all illegal — except for the very few carried out in pursuit of a validly-issued search warrant in accordance with the Fourth Amendment. That is the real story. Drawing our attention to the violations unfortunately sends the message that the “authorized” spying on us is nothing to be concerned about.
When information about the massive NSA domestic spying program began leaking earlier in the summer, Deputy Attorney General James Cole assured us of the many levels of safeguards to prevent the unauthorized collection, storage, and distribution of our communications. He promised to explain the NSA’s record “in as transparent a way as we possibly can.”
Yet two months later we only discover from more leaked documents the thousands of times communications were intercepted in violation of their own standards! It is hardly reassuring, therefore, when they promise us they will be more forthcoming in the future. No one believes them because they have lied and covered up continuously. The only time any light at all is shone on these criminal acts by the government is when a whistleblower comes forth with new and ever more disturbing information.
Americans are increasingly concerned over these violations of their privacy. Calls for reform grow. However, whenever Washington finds itself in a scandal, the government responds by naming a government panel made up of current and former government employees to investigate any mistakes the government might have made. The recommendations invariably are that even more government employees must be hired to provide an additional layer or two of oversight. That is supposed to reassure us that reforms have been made, while in fact it is just insiders covering up for those who have hired them to investigate.
Let us hope the American people will decide that such trickery is no longer acceptable. It is time to take a very serious look at the activities of the US intelligence community. The first step would be a dramatic reduction in appropriations to force a focus on those real, not imagined, threats to our national security. We should not be considered the enemy.
Ron Paul
Ron Paul Institute
August 19, 2013
(Below is just a full transcript of Ron Paul's weekly address above)
Thanks to more documents leaked by Edward Snowden, this time to the Washington Post, we learned last week that a secret May 2012 internal audit by the NSA revealed 2,776 incidents of “unauthorized” collection of information on American citizens over the previous 12 months. They are routinely breaking their own rules and covering it up.
The Post article quotes an NSA spokesman assuring the paper that the NSA attempts to identify such problems “at the earliest possible moment.” But what happened to all those communications intercepted improperly in the meantime? The answer is, they were logged and stored anyway.
We also learned that the NSA routinely intercepts information from Americans while actually targeting foreigners, and that this is not even considered a violation. These intercepts are not deleted once discovered, even though they violate the government’s own standards. As the article reports, “once added to its databases, absent other restrictions, the communications of Americans may be searched freely.”
The Post article quotes an NSA official explaining that the thousands of unauthorized communications intercepts yearly are relatively insignificant. “You can look at it as a percentage of our total activity that occurs each day. You look at a number in absolute terms that looks big, and when you look at it in relative terms, it looks a little different.”
So although the numbers of Americans who have had their information intercepted in violation of NSA’s own rules seems large, it is actually miniscule compared to the huge volume of our communications they intercept in total!
Though it made for a sensational headline last week, the fact is these 2,776 “violations” over the course of one year are completely irrelevant. The millions and millions of “authorized” intercepts of our communications are all illegal — except for the very few carried out in pursuit of a validly-issued search warrant in accordance with the Fourth Amendment. That is the real story. Drawing our attention to the violations unfortunately sends the message that the “authorized” spying on us is nothing to be concerned about.
When information about the massive NSA domestic spying program began leaking earlier in the summer, Deputy Attorney General James Cole assured us of the many levels of safeguards to prevent the unauthorized collection, storage, and distribution of our communications. He promised to explain the NSA’s record “in as transparent a way as we possibly can.”
Yet two months later we only discover from more leaked documents the thousands of times communications were intercepted in violation of their own standards! It is hardly reassuring, therefore, when they promise us they will be more forthcoming in the future. No one believes them because they have lied and covered up continuously. The only time any light at all is shone on these criminal acts by the government is when a whistleblower comes forth with new and ever more disturbing information.
Americans are increasingly concerned over these violations of their privacy. Calls for reform grow. However, whenever Washington finds itself in a scandal, the government responds by naming a government panel made up of current and former government employees to investigate any mistakes the government might have made. The recommendations invariably are that even more government employees must be hired to provide an additional layer or two of oversight. That is supposed to reassure us that reforms have been made, while in fact it is just insiders covering up for those who have hired them to investigate.
Let us hope the American people will decide that such trickery is no longer acceptable. It is time to take a very serious look at the activities of the US intelligence community. The first step would be a dramatic reduction in appropriations to force a focus on those real, not imagined, threats to our national security. We should not be considered the enemy.
ax1
Legend
Invalid Link Removed
Soldiers being forced to pop pills by exempt officer class
Alex Jones & Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com August 19, 2013
The mass drugging of US troops is one of the most underreported scandals of the modern era, with soldiers not only being used as guinea pigs in a brave new world of pharmacological experimentation, but also having their rights stripped as a result.
Sgt. Joe Biggs Witnessed Troops Being Drugged (Interview with Sgt. Joe Biggs skip to 7:10)
Soldiers being forced to pop pills by exempt officer class
Alex Jones & Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com August 19, 2013
The mass drugging of US troops is one of the most underreported scandals of the modern era, with soldiers not only being used as guinea pigs in a brave new world of pharmacological experimentation, but also having their rights stripped as a result.
Sgt. Joe Biggs Witnessed Troops Being Drugged (Interview with Sgt. Joe Biggs skip to 7:10)
Sgt. Joe Biggs recently joined the Alex Jones Show to describe in shocking details how he witnessed soldiers in Afghanistan displaying careless ignorance of the threat posed by IED’s because the troops were high on Percocet, a prescription painkiller based on oxycodone, a Schedule II narcotic analgesic which is derived from opium.
While US troops are supposedly Invalid Link Removed (even as opium production Invalid Link Removed),Invalid Link Removed, some of which are being prescribed to them.
There is now an epidemic of drug use in the U.S. military. Invalid Link Removed that, “Since 1999, failed drug tests have increased in the U.S. Air Force by 82%, and in the U.S. Army by 37%.”
Invalid Link Removed, the Defense Department notes that “20 percent of U.S. troops are on psychiatric drugs, and that they are often handed as much as a 180-day supply of those pills before being deployed.”
The most underreported aspect of this whole scandal however is that troops are in many cases being forced to take prescription drugs against their will, while those in the officer class are often exempt from both the drugs and the increasing number of dangerous vaccines that are mandatory for new recruits.
“U.S. troops are being forced to take drugs like Prozac and Seroquel for anxiety and depression. Troops cannot refuse to take the drugs without consequences from their superiors. Resistance by U.S. troops to their orders is also running high. Some U.S. military patrols decline to carry out their “search and kill” missions and, instead, return to their bases claiming they carried out their orders,” Invalid Link Removed
Other drugs like Mefloquine are also causing soldiers to go on killing rampages, Invalid Link Removed when Robert Bales shot dead 17 Afghan civilians including nine children. Drug abuse is also a core factor behind the shocking rise in soldiers committing suicide. Invalid Link Removed are attributed to side-effects from medication.
However, the cycle of drug abuse does not end for US troops when they leave the military. Once hooked on prescription medications, veterans are forced to visit psychologists who diagnose them with mental disorders in order to keep a steady supply of drugs flowing and feed the dependency.
This in turn relegates veterans to become second class citizens, with their Invalid Link Removed as a result of being permanently labeled as having post traumatic stress disorder.
One of the core reasons why the Pentagon is encouraging the mass drugging of US troops is to grease the skids for Invalid Link Removed, a long term agenda that will see all soldiers permanently drugged in order to produce “behavior-modifying and performance-enhancing characteristics”.
The mass drugging of US troops is another aspect of government social engineering. It is about creating yet another huge sector of society – just like children in school or foster care – whose dependence on the state is secured via the method of artificially creating a dangerous dependence on drugs.
ax1
Legend
Its sad the troops dont have free speech on mainstream media such as CNN.
Zac Speed
Member
I've read about so many atrocities committed against our troops by our own government.. The Gulf War Syndrome would have to top it for me. DU sickness and the potential effects it could have on your children is sickening.
I wish our troops would uphold their oaths and attack the domestic enemy that is our federal and judicial system.
That ****ing Navy commercial that talks about protecting democracy makes me wanna smash my ****ing TV every time I see it.. Democracy... Constitutional Republic you jerkoffs.
I wish our troops would uphold their oaths and attack the domestic enemy that is our federal and judicial system.
That ****ing Navy commercial that talks about protecting democracy makes me wanna smash my ****ing TV every time I see it.. Democracy... Constitutional Republic you jerkoffs.
ax1
Legend
Ive read a little about the GWSydrome.
The troops are in general professional and take orders, I dont put blame on most of them. Its the top brass and most of the top goverment that are the primary oath intruders.
Id be careful with using the words "attack," If you mean peacefully attack with peaceful protests then Im all for it
Id rather see our troops stand down to these wars as a whole as a protest rather than attacking the goverment domestically at this stage.
Zac Speed
Member
Ive read a little about the GWSydrome.
The troops are in general professional and take orders, I dont put blame on most of them. Its the top brass and most of the top goverment that are the primary oath intruders.
Id be careful with using the words "attack," If you mean peacefully attack with peaceful protests then Im all for it
Id rather see our troops stand down to these wars as a whole as a protest rather than attacking the goverment domestically at this stage.
I say attack because I can't see these crooked politicians going to prison peacefully.. Giving up this corporate country they've created. I for see troops having to use force to take back our country for We The People.
Whatever the case, if it were me, I'd be handing out treason charges like they were candy.
ax1
Legend
The double problem is that lack of care afterwards. Humans are Guinea pigs and laboratory animals to our "big bro."
You should look up on how the Japanese scientists were so ruthless they would drop chemicals on entire villages in China and then they would go around in chemical suits and gut people in the street. These scientists post WWII were granted full immunity for their inhumane criminal activities, all they had to do was share their science with the USA.
ax1
Legend
Ill tell you, the 2nd Amendment and hope that we will have good Military to unite with is something that gives me hope for the future should things get really bad.
Zac Speed
Member
Hell, our military refused to address a lot of Gulf War cases through the VA.. Sad.
Hell, we also granted Nazi scientists immunity and gave them homes and jobs here in the states. This country was lost in 1913 when we gave monetary control if this country to a private bank in the FED.