Uncategorized

Consensus shredded; major media up against the wall | Jon Rappoport’s Blog

http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2013/04/25/consensus-shredded-major-media-up-against-the-wall/

Consensus shredded; major media up against the wall

Consensus shredded; major media up against the wall

by Jon Rappoport

April 24, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

Television news is shriveling. And it’s under attack from a new breed. You can call them counter-programmers, video freaks, whatever.

But they’re winning.

Every dollar and inch of technology the networks employ move toward an irrefutable image on the screen. “Here it is. Look.”

And counter-programmers say, “Look again. See those guys in the yellow jackets standing right near the bomb when it goes off? They don’t move at all. They’re fine.”

There is something very powerful in that response, because people are addicted to images. When the image you’re watching blows up, because somebody forces you to see something new, you start to wake up and effect a cure, even if you don’t want to.

Image-addiction is sacred to people.

No one goes to the movies and comes out saying, “You know, images don’t really add up to anything. It’s a waste of time.”

No one walks into the Sistine Chapel, looks at Michelangelo’s ceiling, and says, “Why did they bother? They could have just written down a message to explain what the ceiling means.”

No one asks, “Why did they have the president sit there in the Oval Office and address the nation? He could have written a statement or talked on radio.”

Image.

Unbeatable.

So when major media cover a monster of the story, on television, they’re producing images by the ton, day after day, and the anchors are telling us what they add up to, and most viewers soak it all in and accept the force of it as irresistible truth.

If television presents Aurora, Sandy Hook, Boston, and if it pours thousands of impact images at us and tells us what they mean, what are the chances television will, upon learning new facts, reverse course?

What are the odds?

Virtually zero.

Of course, the networks are unwilling to admit mistakes or lies. But at another level, this is television’s unwillingness to injure the medium itself and what it does.

“We showed you all those images and we burned them into your brains, to program you, and now we’re going to say that was an illusion?”

Never happens.

The people who own and run television never turn around, on a huge story, and endanger their medium by admitting that the images were deceptions. Because they’re drug dealers, and their drug is Image.

If the Constitution were written today, people would want to watch it being done, in the room in Philadelphia. They’d want to watch the men at work. They’d want to make up their minds about the Constitution as they would any other television show.

“Well, today, amid long-winded arguments about the proposed Bill of Rights, audience share dropped eight points.”

Uncategorized

Nestle CEO: Water Is Not A Human Right, Should Be Privatized

http://www.thedailysheeple.com/nestle-ceo-water-is-not-a-human-right-should-be-privatized_042013

Nestle CEO: Water Is Not A Human Right, Should Be Privatized

Anthony Gucciardi
Natural Society

April 23rd, 2013
Reader Views: 5,590

brabeck-letm

Is water a free and basic human right, or should all the water on the planet belong to major corporations and be treated as a product? Should the poor who cannot afford to pay these said corporations suffer from starvation due to their lack of financial wealth? According to the former CEO and now Chairman of the largest food product manufacturer in the world, corporations should own every drop of water on the planet — and you’re not getting any unless you pay up.

The company notorious for sending out hordes of ‘internet warriors’ to defend the company and its actions online in comments and message boards (perhaps we’ll find some below) even takes a firm stance behind Monsanto’s GMOs and their ‘proven safety’. In fact, the former Nestle CEO actually says that his idea of water privatization is very similar to Monsanto’s GMOs. In a video interview, Nestle Chairman Peter Brabeck-Letmathe states that there has never been ‘one illness’ ever caused from the consumption of GMOs.

Watch the video below for yourself:

The way in which this sociopath clearly has zero regard for the human race outside of his own wealth and the development of Nestle, who has been caught funding attacks against GMO labeling, can be witnessed when watching and listening to his talk on the issue. This is a company that actually goes into struggling rural areas and extracts the groundwater for their bottled water products, completely destroying the water supply of the area without any compensation. In fact, they actually make rural areas in the United States foot the bill.

As reported on by Corporate Watch, Nestle and former CEO Peter Brabeck-Letmathe have a long history of disregarding public health and abusing the environment to take part in the profit of an astounding $35 billion in annual profit from water bottle sales alone. The report states:

“Nestlé production of mineral water involves the abuse of vulnerable water resources. In the Serra da Mantiqueira region of Brazil, home to the “circuit of waters” park whose groundwater has a high mineral content and medicinal properties, over-pumping has resulted in depletion and long-term damage.”

Nestle has also come under fire over the assertion that they are actually conducting business with massive slavery rings. Another Corporate Watch entry details:

“In 2001, Nestlé faced criticism for buying cocoa from the Ivory Coast and Ghana, which may have been produced using child slaves.[58] According to an investigative report by the BBC, hundreds of thousands of children in Mali, Burkina Faso and Togo were being purchased from their destitute parents and shipped to the Ivory Coast, to be sold as slaves to cocoa farms.”

So is water a human right, or should it be owned by big corporations? Well, if water is not here for all of us, then perhaps air should be owned by major corporations as well. And as for crops, Monsanto is already working hard to make sure their monopoly on our staple crops and beyond is well situated. It should really come as no surprise that this Nestle Chairman fights to keep Monsanto’s GMOs alive and well in the food supply, as his ideology lines right up with that of Monsanto.

Delivered by The Daily Sheeple

Uncategorized

Guest Post: Boston Marathon Attacks, Chechnya And Oil – The Hidden U.S. Connection – BlackListedNews.com

http://blacklistednews.com/

Guest Post: Boston Marathon Attacks, Chechnya And Oil – The Hidden U.S. Connection

John Daly of OilPrice.com

As Boston and U.S. security agencies congratulate themselves over the apparent neutralization of a pair of Chechens that bombed the Boston Marathon, troubling questions are beginning to arise.

First and foremost is, why a pair of Chechens, born in the former Soviet republic of Kyrgyzstan, apparently committed the attack?

For possible answers, one must looks beyond the present and delve into Russia’s and the USSR’s past policies towards Chechnya, and since 1991, U.S. policy in the Caucasus, which since the 1991 implosion of the USSR had a single focus – the exploitation of the Caspian’s massive energy reserves.

It is a history that makes for deeply uncomfortable reading, but one that may eventually provide some answers to seemingly intractable questions.

After Iran transferred Chechnya to the Russian empire under the Treaty of Gulistan following the 1804-1813 Russo-Persian War, Russian troops entered the region to assert control, resulting in a long-drawn out and bitter campaign marked by numerous atrocities until Imam Shamil surrendered to the Russians in 1859, causing many Chechen Muslims to emigrate to the Ottoman Empire. Following the 1917 Russian revolution, Chechnya suffered the travails of the rest of the Soviet population until 23 February 1944, when Stalin ordered Chechnya’s population deported en masse to Soviet Central Asia on suspicions of them being traitors and working with Nazi forces. In eight days, the People’s Commissariat for Internal Affairs (NKVD), predecessor to the Committee for State Security (KGB), forcefully deported 350,000 to 400,000 Chechens and 91,250 Ingush from the Caucasus, mainly to Central Asia, primarily Kazakhstan, but others as far as Kyrgyzstan and Eastern Siberia.

Soviet officials assessed that during 1944 to 1948, between 14.6% and 23.7% of the exiled population perished.

And many Chechens were swallowed up by the NVKD’s Gulag archipelago, but even there, their toughness and militancy set them apart. As Russian Nobel Prize winner Alexander Solzhenitsyn noted his is three-volume study, The GuLAG Archipelago, “There was one nation which would not give in, would not acquire the mental habits of submission – and not just individual rebels among them, but the whole nation to a man. These were the Chechens… They had been treacherously snatched from their home, and from that day they believed in nothing… The years went by – and they owned just as little as they had to begin with. The Chechens never sought to please, to ingratiate themselves with the bosses; their attitude was always haughty and indeed openly hostile.”

Fast forward to the 1991 dissolution of the breakup of the USSR.

Chechens subsequently fought two wars against Russian forces, the first from 1994 to 1996, and the second from October 1999 until early 2009, with both conflicts marked by violence and atrocities committed on both sides.

In 2007 Russian President Vladimir Putin appointed Ramzan Kadyrov Chechnya’s new president. Two years later the American organization Freedom House included Chechnya in the “Worst of the Worst” list of most repressive societies in the world, together with Burma, North Korea and China’s Tibet.

But the question remains why, when the USSR was fragmenting, was Moscow so determined to retain Chechnya?

In a word – oil, for both its indigenous reserves and as the sole transit point for Azerbaijan’s rising exports, which Western companies were eagerly seeking to export to Western markets rather than via Russia.

Few today remember that Putin’s first job when appointed Prime Minister on 9 August 1999 by Russian President Boris Yeltsin was to build an oil pipeline bypassing Chechyna, as Transneft, Russia’s pipeline monopoly, controlled the Baku-Novorossiisk line, the sole export route for Azerbaijani “early” oil exports, which crossed 95 miles of Chechen territory, a region which had been at war with the Kremlin since 1994. Following Putin’s appointment Yeltsin held a council of war over Dagestan and Putin made a rash promise that he could end a crisis caused by the incursion of 2,000 rebels from Chechnya into Dagestan in “a week and a half or two weeks.”

Work began on the bypass line on 26 October 1999. The conflict combined with other issues reduced Azeri exports via Baku-Novorossiisk in early 2000 to an average of only 10,000 barrels per day (bpd.) In April 2000 construction finished on the $140 million, 204-mile Baku-Novorossiisk bypass via Dagestan to Tikhoretsk. The bypass had a potential capacity of 120,000 bpd, but by then Azerbaijan already had other plans, having worked with neighboring Georgia to develop an alternative pipeline route to Georgia’s Black Sea port of Supsa, completely outside of Russian control. When Yeltsin resigned on 31 December 1999 Putin became acting President and has continued to lead the Russian state ever since, eiher as Prime Minister or President.

For Putin, quite aside from issues of pride, An independent Chechnya could not only lead to a loss of revenue from the republic’s modest oil production (of such quality that Chechen oil was used to light lamps in the Vatican) and ruin plans to extract transit fees for Azeri “early oil,” but lead to a significant potential loss of Caspian reserves once the sea’s waters and seabed were divided, if Chechnya aligned itself with neighboring Dagestan.

U.S. penetration of Azerbaijan’s and Kazakhstan’s energy sectors continued apace during the conflict. As reported by EC-TACIS, for the period 1994-1999 the main sources of foreign direct investment in Azerbaijan were the United States with 28 percent, followed by Britain with 15 percent. FDI in Azerbaijan exploded from only $30 million in 1994 to $827 million in 1999, about 17 percent of Azerbaijan’s GDP, with approximately 90 percent of FDI concentrated in the country’s hydrocarbons sector, while Kazakhstan FDI accounted for $1.6 billion in the same period, but which now exceeds $160 billion of foreign FDI. Russia was clearly losing the battle to develop Caspian energy, and an independent Chechen-Dagestani state would make Moscow’s position untenable and hence had to be stopped at any cost. U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney observed the year before Putin’s appointment, “I can’t think of a time when we’ve had a region emerge as suddenly to become as strategically significant as the Caspian.”

In 2005 the western consortium attempting to cut Russia out of the Caspian energy loop achieved its goal. The $3.6 billion, one million barrel per day, 1,092-mile Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) pipeline, which ships Azeri Caspian oil to Turkey’s Mediterranean Ceyhan port, began operations in May 2005, transiting high-quality crude from Azerbaijan’s offshore Azeri-Chirag-Guneshli fields to Turkey’s deep-water Mediterranean terminus at Ceyhan.

Accordingly, the Chechen conflict dovetailed perfectly not only into Washington’s plans, to bog down the Russian military in a long, drawn-out conflict in the Caucasus, but provide Western energy companies with an alternative route as Chechnya was slowly ground down by the Russian military.

Oil that would have otherwise moved northwards to Russia, providing lucrative transit fees.

Chechnya proved ground zero for both Western political and business interests.

All of the above history, virtually unknown in the U.S., is deeply known to every Chechen. The shadow war between Moscow and Washington for the Caspian’s energy riches saw Chechnya squarely caught in the middle, leaving the Chechen homeland virtually destroyed, something to remember when reading the increasingly contradictory news reports coming out of Washington about the blood shed in Boston by the Tsarnaev brothers, as the U.S. is hardly blameless about the carnage visited on their ancestral homeland.



Uncategorized

Boston bombing: citizen video-analysts creating major problems for controlled media | Jon Rappoport’s Blog

http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2013/04/23/boston-bombing-citizen-video-analysts-creating-major-problems-for-controlled-media/

Boston bombing: citizen video-analysts creating major problems for controlled media

Boston bombing: citizen video-analysts create major problems for controlled media

by Jon Rappoport

April 23, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

You’re a reporter for a TV news outlet.

You’ve become aware of a disturbing trend. Thousands of private citizens are now analyzing video and photographs of crime scenes and posting their findings.

They’re hounds, and they can’t be stopped. They’re looking at news footage, casual video, photos, and what they’re coming up with challenges the official story lines your network pushes.

Some of their analysis is ridiculous, but some of it isn’t.

For example, video footage of the first bomb in Boston doesn’t appear to show any shrapnel damage to the fencing near the explosion, or to the blue canopy just above the street. You, the reporter, wonder about that.

The now-famous 78-year-old runner who fell down in the street, just after the first explosion? Security personnel wearing yellow jackets were standing closer to the bomb, but they didn’t wobble or duck or waver. You, the reporter, wonder about that, too.

You, the reporter, see a photo of a storefront which was presumably right next to the first bomb. The windows are blown out. But all the glass is lying in the street, which would indicate the force of the explosion was coming from inside the store. How is that possible, you ask yourself.

Then there are the quickly circulating photos of the man in the wheelchair. He’s missing large parts of both legs. People are pushing the chair. His legs are bleeding. But other posted photos? Do they show he already was wearing prosthetics? Is it true he should already be dead from the massive blood loss? You, the reporter, are disturbed by this.

You also look at several photos of the pressure-cooker bomb. In the twisted metal remains, you see discoloration, but no signs the nails or ball bearings in the bomb penetrated the pressure cooker or pitted it or ended up embedded in it.

You look at photos of men standing near the Marathon finish line, the men in identical uniforms, who have variously been described as Navy Seals, Coast Guard, and Craft International security personnel.

What were they doing there? Running a drill? Watching suspects or patsies or bomb-planters? What was going on?

You look at a photo of the younger Tsarnaev brother leaving the scene after the bombs went off. He’s still…wearing his backpack? And another photo, the one of the ripped-apart backpack on the ground. Is that a white square on it? Because one of the Seal-Craft-Coast Guard guys had a white square on his intact backpack…and is that him, leaving the scene of the bombing without that backpack? Hmmm…

You, the reporter, now face several quandaries.

First, if you decide to look into all this, you’ll have to do actual work. Investigation. That isn’t part of your job description. You basically talk to official sources, obtain their statements, repeat them, and sound like you know what you’re talking about. Investigation? What’s that?

Second, if you undertake a serious inquiry, you’re going to have to verify that all these photos and all this video footage are pristine and haven’t been altered or cropped in order to mislead.

You’ll have to find experts to help you. More work. You’re already feeling exhausted, just thinking about it.

On the other hand, your network has shown faked and cropped photos and edited footage in the past, to slant stories. So maybe you can get by with less work.

However, there is a rule in your business. Reporters aren’t allowed to follow their noses. They aren’t allowed to do investigations on their own. They most definitely aren’t permitted to do technical analysis of evidence, like crime-scene photos or video. No, all technical interpretation has to come from government agencies.

If you go off the reservation, you’ll take heavy hits from your bosses.

But all this is meaningless. It’s just mental masturbation, because, finally, you know there is no possible way your producer will allow you to present evidence that the official Boston scenario has gaping holes in it.

Your own network has the explicit job of promoting that scenario.

You’d be torpedoing your own people. Professional suicide. Just walking into your producer’s office and pointing to issues raised by private-citizen analysis of video? It would put you on a watch list.

Your producer would think, “This guy’s gone soft in the head. He wants to pursue a story on his own. He must be some kind of grandstanding goof. He doesn’t have a firm grip on things. He doesn’t know what his job really is. And he wants to raise doubts about the Boston bombing? Wow…”

To the degree that you have any shred of conscience left, you’re in a bind. Maybe it’s the moment to offload that last bit of idealism and go completely corporate. It’s not as if you’ve been challenging your bosses; you’ve just been asking yourself questions privately. So what’s the problem? Just stop asking the questions.

Maybe you’re depressed. Maybe you should go in and see a shrink and get a script for Zoloft. Something to take the edge off. Of course, then you’d have to cut back on your drinking. Screw that. Just up the booze. Have a few more every night after work. Make the coffee stronger in the morning.

Wait. An idea is forming.

It’s coming.

Sit there. Let it formulate.

Mmmm….

Yes. Yes! Here it is. Some of these video hounds are saying no one at all was hurt or killed in Boston; the whole bombing thing was a hoax. Well, tell that to the doctors at the hospitals who were doing amputations.

Okay. Okay. Now you’re on to something. You can feel it. There’s an obvious way to destroy all this wildcat video evidence in one fell swoop and, at the same time, endear yourself to your bosses.

They’ll be grateful. You can rack up some brownie points. They’ll think of you as a company man. A tough defender of the realm, their realm.

Anyway, you’ve got a deadline to meet. You have to put something together. It may as well be this:

Take the most radical opinions these video hounds are promoting, package them all into one article, and imply that every hound is a complete freak. All their video analysis must be wrong, because they’re all crazy. It’s the old rejection by generality. And by ad hominem. By straw man. Didn’t you learn something about those logical fallacies in college? Time to put them to use.

Do the conspiracy-theorist thing. Say these weirdos have far too much time on their hands. And what else? They’re dangerous. Sure. Refer back to that FBI dude who’s in charge of the Boston investigation, DesLauriers, who said people should focus on helping the investigation by looking at certain photos and no others.

How did he put it? He said there were irrelevant photos out there, and if people tipped the FBI to them, they’d overload agents and delay the search for the bombers.

That’s it. These private video hounds are dangerous. They’re giving people too much information.

So they have crazy ideas, one. They’re saying nobody was hurt, there were no bombs, two. They’re claiming all the bleeding people at the Marathon were actors brought in from some outfit in Colorado, three. They’re saying these massacre ops are designed to shut down freedom in America, four. They’re dangerous, five.

Roll all that up into a ball and you’re good to go. Whatever they’ve actually got in terms of troubling and disturbing and truthful video and photo evidence will disappear in a sea of ridicule.

Perfect.

Imply there are two basic classes of people: the normals and the crazies. The crazies are threatening the rest of us. They’re multiplying like fruit flies. They’re swarming the Internet. They’re disrespecting the wounded and dead—don’t forget that one. How dare they come out with all this insanity as the families are grieving and in turmoil.

Yeah. There is only one true stream of information, and the public has to know it. It comes from the major networks. There has to be a central story line, because if there isn’t, the whole country will fall into chaos. Don’t actually say that, but realize you’re on the side of the angels here. You’re standing tall against the barbarians at the gates.

Right. You’re giving the audience a choice. Do they want to be nuts, or do they want to be normal. Normal is the wave of the future. Soon, that’s all there will be. The others will be wiped out. They have no cache. They have no right to challenge the order of things.

Isn’t that what Arthur Jensen said in the movie Network? There is one planetary, galactic order of things, and everybody has live under it.

Expand the piece. Take it all the way back to 9/11, and the loonies who claimed the towers couldn’t have been taken down by the planes. Yeah. They said there were bombs inside the buildings. They said Building 7 didn’t go down from a fire. Idiots.

Why not do history? Makes you sound smarter. JFK. “Oswald didn’t act alone.” That’s where it all started, that’s how the conspiracy germ spread. It was a disease.

That’s a great metaphor. The plague of conspiracy theories. It had a ground zero, in Dallas, on November 22nd, 1963. From there, the virus moved through time. It’s all one epidemic.

Call a few shrinks. Get comments from them. A psychological pandemic. These guys always want face time. Give it to them. Let them speculate on why the plague is accelerating.

Geez. Maybe this could become a three-part series. “We investigate the trend of conspiracy thinking. Why is it happening? Who are these people? Where do they come from? What do they really want?”

Then…oh yeah. We find some guy who was a conspiracy nut but he woke up and realized he was about to go off the cliff, so he stepped back. He was addicted. It was an addiction. He had alienated his whole family and all his friends.

Then he had a revelation. He saw what had happened to him. Get a few juicy quotes. “I needed a way to rebel against society, so I chose this. It was a fad. I joined up. It was a kind of cult. I made new friends. But then I saw that these people weren’t like me. I was ruining my life. I was walking around paranoid all the time…I finally came to my senses…”

Nail down the place and time when he woke up. Maybe take a camera crew there. “This was the spot. I was walking along this stretch of beach one night, all alone, and it hit me. I was isolated. I had no ties left to my community…”

Yeah. Plays very well. Do you want to be in the cold, on the outside, or do you want to be near the hearth, where the tribe is safe?

With a series, a three-part “investigation,” you could establish yourself as the go-to guy whenever a new conspiracy theory pops up. They’d come to you. You, the expert. This could be a very good career move.

And why pretend? That’s what you’re in this for, isn’t it? A career? So stop fooling around with all the freakazoid photo and video evidence. Just go for it.

It’s a war. The independent journalists and bloggers and video loons are trying to steal food out of your kids’ mouths. You can lie down in the road or you can fight back. If you’re going to fight, take off the gloves. Screw that half-way stuff.

Who knows more about conspiracies than anyone else? The CIA, the FBI, the intelligence community. Hell, after a few years of attacking the weirdos and nutballs out there, you might graduate up into a more distinguished and rarefied atmosphere, where real conspiracies are planned and carried out for the sake of national security. The real stuff, the right stuff.

You could become a “our national intelligence correspondent.” Wouldn’t that be something. You’d have access to the big boys and some of their secrets. You’d prove you could be trusted.

You’d never have to look at another foot of video put together by losers who’ll never get within a thousand miles of real news.

You’ll never have to wonder whether you’re doing the right thing. You’ll live in a place that’s far from the madding crowd. You’ll drink single malt instead of rotgut. You’ll sit down with senators and lobbyists and bankers and diplomats.

You’ll turn into a controlled drunk who knows when to start and when to stop. You’ll find inner peace and all that crap, knowing you’re serving the best interests of your country and the people who own it and run it.

You’ll write a movie script about the Agency stopping a terrorist plot in New York. You’ll meet people from Hollywood.

One night, high above the city of angels, a beautiful actress will take you in her arms…

And some day, through your CIA connections, you’ll learn about a brain-bending scandal that’s brewing under the surface of Washington, and they’ll give you the green light to go out there and dig up the information you already have in your back pocket.

You’ll be Bob Woodward and the doors will open for you wherever you go.

You’ll be unstoppable.

You’ll be the man who finds out all the secrets.

Except the real ones.

Jon Rappoport

The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

About these ads

Uncategorized

U.S. Supported Chechen Terrorists – BlackListedNews.com

http://blacklistednews.com/

U.S. Supported Chechen Terrorists

Source: Washington’s Blog

It’s extensively documented that U.S. backing of Al Qaeda led to 9/11, and that the U.S. is the world’slargest sponsor of terror.

Former FBI agent Colleen Rowley – a 2002 Time Person of the Yearpoints out that the neocons also backed Chechen terrorists as a way to challenge Russia:

Chechen “terrorists” proved useful to the U.S. in keeping pressure on the Russians, much as the Afghan mujahedeen were used in the anti-Soviet war in Afghanistan from 1980 to 1989. In fact, many neocons signed up as Chechnya’s “friends,” including former CIA Director James Woolsey.

***

For instance, see this 2004 article in the UK Guardian, entitled, “The Chechens’ American friends: The Washington neocons’ commitment to the war on terror evaporates in Chechnya, whose cause they have made their own.”

Author John Laughland wrote: “the leading group which pleads the Chechen cause is the American Committee for Peace in Chechnya (ACPC). The list of the self-styled ‘distinguished Americans’ who are its members is a roll call of the most prominent neoconservatives who so enthusiastically support the ‘war on terror.’

“They include Richard Perle, the notorious Pentagon adviser; Elliott Abrams of Iran-Contra fame; Kenneth Adelman, the former US ambassador to the UN who egged on the invasion of Iraq by predicting it would be ‘a cakewalk’; Midge Decter, biographer of Donald Rumsfeld and a director of the rightwing Heritage Foundation; Frank Gaffney of the militarist Centre for Security Policy; Bruce Jackson, former US military intelligence officer and one-time vice-president of Lockheed Martin, now president of the US Committee on Nato; Michael Ledeen of the American Enterprise Institute, a former admirer of Italian fascism and now a leading proponent of regime change in Iran; and R. James Woolsey, the former CIA director who is one of the leading cheerleaders behind George Bush’s plans to re-model the Muslim world along pro-US lines.”

***

Prominent former New York Times journalist (and author of The Commission book) Phil Shenon’s discovery of the incredible “Terrible Missed Chance” a couple of years ago.

Shenon’s discovery involved key information that the FBI and the entire “intelligence” community mishandled and covered up, not only before 9/11 but for a decade afterward. And it also related to the exact point of my 2002 “whistleblower memo” that led to the post 9/11 DOJ-Inspector General investigation about FBI failures and also partially helped launch the 9/11 Commission investigation.

But still the full truth did not come out, even after Shenon’s blockbuster discovery in 2011 of the April 2001 memo linking the main Chechen leader Ibn al Khattab to Osama bin Laden. The buried April 2001 memo had been addressed to FBI Director Louis Freeh (another illegal recipient of MEK money, by the way!) and also to eight of the FBI’s top counter-terrorism officials.

Similar memos must have been widely shared with all U.S. intelligence in April 2001. Within days of terrorist suspect Zaccarias Moussaoui’s arrest in Minnesota on Aug. 16, 2001, French intelligence confirmed that Moussaoui had been fighting under and recruiting for Ibn al-Khattab, raising concerns about Moussaoui’s flight training.

Yet FBI Headquarters officials balked at allowing a search of his laptop and other property, still refusing to recognize that: 1) the Chechen separatists were themselves a “terrorist group” for purposes of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act’s (FISA) legal requirement of acting “on behalf of a foreign power” and 2) that Moussaoui’s link to Ibn al Khattab inherently then linked him to bin Laden’s well-recognized Al Qaeda group for purposes of FISA (the point in my memo).

This all occurred during the same time that CIA Director George Tenet and other counter-terrorism officials — and don’t forget that Tenet was apprised of the information about Moussaoui’s arrest around Aug. 24, 2001 — told us their “hair was on fire” over the prospect of a major terrorist attack and “the system was blinking red.”

The post 9/11 investigations launched as a result of my 2002 “whistleblower memo” did conclude that a major mistake, which could have prevented or reduced 9/11, was the lack of recognition of al Khattab’s Chechen fighters as a “terrorist group” for purposes of FISA.

***

Officials can get confused when their former covert “assets” turn into enemies themselves. That’s what has happened with al-Qaeda-linked jihadists in Libya and Syria, fighters who the U.S. government favored in their efforts to topple the Qaddafi and Assad regimes, respectively. These extremists are prone to turn against their American arms suppliers and handlers once the common enemy is defeated.

The same MO exists with the U.S. and Israel currently collaborating with the Iranian MEK terrorists who have committed assassinations inside Iran. The U.S. government has recently shifted the MEK terrorists from the ranks of “bad” to “good” terrorists as part of a broader campaign to undermine the Iranian government. For details, see “Our (New) Terrorists, the MEK: Have We Seen This Movie Before?”

***

the lies and disinformation that go into the confusing and ever-morphing notion of “terrorism” result from the U.S. Military Industrial Complex (and its little brother, the “National Security Surveillance Complex”) and their need to control the mainstream media’s framing of the story.

So, a simplistic narrative/myth is put forth to sustain U.S. wars. From time to time, those details need to be reworked and some of the facts “forgotten” to maintain the storyline about bad terrorists “who hate the U.S.” when, in reality, the U.S. Government may have nurtured the same forces as “freedom fighters” against various “enemies.”

The bottom line is to never forget that “a poor man’s war is terrorism while a rich man’s terrorism is war” – and sometimes those lines cross for the purposes of big-power politics. War and terrorism seem to work in sync that way.

(And read this post from Sibel Edmonds, former FBI translator, who the Department of Justice’s Inspector General and several senators have called extremely credible.)

Was the Boston terror attack yet more blowback from idiotic U.S. foreign policy?

Given that we have recently backed Al Qaeda terrorists in Libya, Syria and elsewhere, the idiocy continues …

Postscript: We do not know what the true facts of the Boston bombing are. Not only are thee confusing and contradictory facts, but – as Yves Smith points out – there’s not yet even an “official” story.

Uncategorized

Many Bostonians Love And Worship The Miltiarized Police State – BlackListedNews.com

http://blacklistednews.com/

Many Bostonians Love And Worship The Miltiarized Police State

following the implementation of a full blown militarized police state in and around Boston. These mindless sheep were cheering the suspect’s capture despite the fact that the FBI and local police forces have still failed to produce any concrete evidence proving that either of the two suspects planted the bombs.
in the name of capturing a single 19 year old young man.

It is a documented fact that these militarized police forces conducted warrantless unconstitutional door to door searches and restricted travel for no justifiable reason. These types of warrantless searches are a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment which guards against unreasonable searches and seizures. The actions taken by Governor Deval Patrick and the militarized police goons were unlawful according to the supreme law of the land and a misuse of government resources. Even after conducting these unlawful searches for hours on end the storm troopers still failed to find the suspect that they were looking for. Once the so-called lock down was lifted the suspect was found minutes later by a man who saw something suspicious near his boat after he was allowed to leave his home. If these idiots didn’t roll out full blown martial law throughout the area and simply asked for the public’s help in locating this person, the suspect would have been found much sooner. This is just one reason why it is disgusting to see how so many brainwashed robots were cheering the police forces who conducted these illegal operations.

The state of martial law in and around Boston undoubtedly resulted in a tremendous amount of revenue lost for businesses in and around the area. Of course the stooges in the corporate media won’t talk about that or the legality and the wisdom of such a boneheaded operation. The reason they won’t is because the roll out of a militarized police force in the name of safety and security is now an accepted norm in America.

People just don’t seem to understand that operations like these do not guarantee your safety or security. As I’ve pointed out in previous articles covering the Boston Marathon bombing, there was a huge police presence at the Boston Marathon. Despite the vast number of police and security forces, they still failed to prevent the bombing. When one understands that the government has a historical track record of staging attacks like these in order to justify different agendas, it makes perfect sense as to why all of these security forces couldn’t prevent the attack. However, if we were to assume that this was a real attack that wasn’t sanctioned by official channels, this was a huge police failure. Of course we don’t see anybody in the media questioning the failure of the police to keep people safe do we? Instead, we see talking head propagandists calling for more police, more security, more searches, more cameras and other assorted bull shit.

What we are witnessing is similar to what we saw after the September 11th attacks when the corporate media failed to scrutinize the obvious incompetence of military officers who failed in their duty to protect the country. Instead, many of those people who displayed gross incompetence in dealing with the September 11th attacks were given promotions. Undoubtedly this was done to keep these people happy and discourage them from blowing the whistle on the countless anomalies that occurred that day.

The bombings have also presented new opportunities for re-emphasizing the worship of the militarized police state at professional sporting events. Worshipping members of the military and police at baseball games, football games and other breads and circus spectacles has become a quasi-religious experience for people ever since the September 11th attacks. We were able to witness this in full force at the recent Boston Red Sox game at Fenway Park that took place following the capture of the 2nd suspect. A pre-game ceremony remembering the victims of the Boston Marathon bombing included a video presentation combining sappy music with images of American flags and police. Not surprisingly, the presentation drew a pavlovian like reaction of cheers and applause from the fans.

showing the actions of SWAT teams forcing families out of their homes without any warrants or probable cause have been posted all over different video sharing web sites.
reporting on the specifics of the unlawful searches including how they were breaking into people’s homes.

The worship of police officers and members of the military being portrayed as heroic figures has become a national mental illness perpetuated by exaggerated media propaganda and fear mongering. Even though there might be a few good police officers who do their job and uphold civil liberties, there are far too many cases of the police abusing their authority and engaging in an assortment of illegal activities. Many police officers are nothing more than common criminals who enjoy bullying people around. People in third world countries already have a general understanding that the police are corrupt and shouldn’t be trusted but unfortunately it looks like most Americans haven’t quite grasped this concept yet.

Uncategorized

Big Brother Is Smiling: Congress Sells Your Privacy For A Cool $84 Million – BlackListedNews.com

http://blacklistednews.com/

Big Brother Is Smiling: Congress Sells Your Privacy For A Cool $84 Million

Spy

In case you were wondering why so many Democrats switched sides during the most recent CISPA vote, the answer is exactly what you think it is: $$$. And lots of it. Last year’s CISPA vote only managed to secure 40 Democrat supporters. This time around, the number leapt to 92.

[A] new coalition of special interests, which include America’s two largest cellular service providers AT&T, Inc. and Verizon Wireless — jointly owned by Verizon Communications Inc. and Vodafone Group Plc. — as well as two of the nation’s largest software firms Microsoft Corp. and Intel Corp., came together to create a similar data grab bill (Microsoft has since renounced its support). Security firms like Symantec Corp. also backed the bill.

Pushing the bill through was $84M USD in funding from special interest backers.

$84 million is change-of-heart money, although one imagines those contributing checked and double-checked their “sponsored” representatives to make sure they were all on the same page. As DailyTech points out, nearly $86 million went into the SOPA push and most of that turned out to be wasted money.

Last Monday, two hundred IBM executives visited the White House to make a last minute push for CISPA. Whatever they said or did must have been very persuasive. By the end of the day, 36 new sponsors had signed on to the bill, up from a very lonely two previous to IBM’s visit. Unsurprisingly, financial motivation was involved, according to numbers gathered by Maplight.

New co-sponsors have received 38 times as much money ($7,626,081) from interests supporting CISPA than from interests opposing ($200,362).

Members of the House in total have received 16 times as much money ($67,665,694) from interests supporting CISPA than from interests opposing ($4,164,596).

Now, it’s up to Senate to come up with some sort of cyber-security bill that has a chance to get passed and dodge a Presidential veto. Fortunately, there’s no clear favorite at the moment (although Lieberman’s bill seems to have the President’s blessing) and with the limited number of voters, the Senate is much more prone to be gridlocked by partisan politics. Of course, a daylong visit by a few lobbyists could win over just enough hearts and minds to be dangerous. In the meantime, it would probably do these senators a world of good to hear from their constituents, if only to remind them that there are plenty of actual people out there who have to live with the consequences of bad legislation.

Uncategorized

Media magic: not one angry person in Boston | Jon Rappoport’s Blog

http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2013/04/22/media-magic-not-one-angry-person-in-boston/

Media magic: not one angry person in Boston

Media magic: not one angry person in Boston

by Jon Rappoport

April 22, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

Shocked? Horrified? Grief-stricken? Determined? Yes, Boston residents who voiced those feelings passed through the media filters and were interviewed on camera.

But angry? Deeply angry at what happened at the Marathon and ready to give vent to it? The screeners took a pass.

I wrote about this subject after the Sandy Hook murders, and it applies to the Aurora massacre as well.

The sober sepulchral tones of media anchors, and their extreme deference to FBI, police, and politicians, form a hypnotic induction for viewers…and these leaders don’t want to break the spell, which is exactly what anger does.

Therefore, it’s a no-go.

Anger is a spark that fires up and spreads. So dampen it. Ignore it. Don’t show it on television news. Instead, say this: “Step back, everybody, huddle in your homes, let the pros do their job, they’ll catch the killers, look at the photos they want you to look at, remain calm, depend on designated officials.”

This is the new American dream.

If you don’t show anger on the television news, it doesn’t exist. Out of sight, out of mind.

Then, once in a while, media can point to an angry group they want to defame: “See, look at those people. They’re angry. They’re the only people who are. So there must be something wrong with them. They’re dangerous. What they stand for must be a threat to all the rest of us…because they’re angry.”

Suppose, right after the killings in Boston, the major networks interviewed 50 people who were in a rage. Viewers would start to wake up. That’s not permitted.

This engineered absence of anger dovetails perfectly with the “have a nice day” philosophy. It’s all about “thinking positive thoughts” and immediately lapsing into a passive invisible state.

A culture of “anger-is-destructive” has made enormous inroads on American life. We even have so-called experts issuing phony statements about the deleterious physical effects of “negative emotions.”

This is preposterous idiocy, at best. The key distinction here is between mindless outrage and anger directed at those who deserve to be exposed for their crimes. It’s also a distinction between bottling up, out of naked fear, such specifically directed outrage, and expressing it.

Unless you believe the American Revolution was fought by smiling troops who strolled into battle like glazed donuts sporting muskets.

Read Tom Paine’s Common Sense, the pamphlet that shook the Colonies and forced the Declaration of Independence. If you see no anger there, you’re dead.

In these modern massacre ops, the media formula works like this: “See, the perpetrators were brought to justice; it worked; the citizenry was kept in the background; nothing negative was expressed; and all’s well that ends well.”

Keeping citizen anger off the front pages and off the television-news screens is a purposeful pose. It’s really an emotional lockdown of the country.

The police not only act as an armed physical surrogate for the people, they also effect an emotional transfer. “You folks don’t have to get angry, give us your feelings, we’ll do the job, and we never hate. We’re efficient.”

This contributes mightily to the sense that we’re living in a land of androids.

Television is the universal teacher Communities and cities learn how to react, should a crisis suddenly descend on them, from having watched how it worked in other places—as television showed it, as television selected it.

“This is how you’re supposed to feel, this is when you feel it, this is the sequence, these are the words you use.”

In this artificial ballet, the last people who are going to doubt the law-enforcement bosses are those who learn from television.

The rule of television coverage operates in another way as well. Suspects in these massacres, if they survive, rarely if ever speak before cameras to a national and world audience, before trial.

The police don’t permit it, and if they did, a defendant’s attorney wouldn’t allow it, on the grounds that prosecutors could use his client’s statements against him in the courtroom. So the accused are buffered off from the public, kept in a tight cocoon.

This contributes to an overall air of extreme caution. The wheels of the machine are grinding; no humans appear to be present. The only officials who speak before cameras are trained to emit bureaucratic blather.

The public accepts this. They buy the presentation—idiot pseudo-scientists using techno-speak to analyze some species of insect, while also throwing off gaseous generalities about the nation, the life of communities, and the coming together of good citizens.

From the earliest days of television, the vaunted anchors who shaped the role for later generations—Ed Murrow, Chet Huntley, David Brinkley, Walter Cronkite—gods to the American audience—affected the air of a reformed drunk who was always walking close to the edge of doom and needed to enunciate his concerns carefully, lest he fall into a pit of actual human experience where he would drown.

This became the rhythm, sound, and tempo of truth.

Now, Brian Williams, and Scott Pelley, the keepers of that flame, are practicing in the same school of understatement, are doing their slow tap dance around the rim of the cliff, assuring viewers they are taking them as far as humans can go without encountering details too sordid for civilized exposure.

Among those omissions are the words and outraged feelings of citizens who demand justice and know there is a great con in progress, a charade.

The lesson was learned in 1963. After that piece of television coverage, the monarchs of media struck out on a different path. Americans actually saw Lee Harvey Oswald, after he was arrested. They saw his anger. They saw him say, “I’m just a patsy.” They saw his disgust and growing hour-by-hour understanding that he was going to his end. They saw he knew he was going to be swallowed up and disappeared. And finally they saw Jack Ruby shoot him in an underground garage.

Guilty or innocent, Oswald transmitted a disquiet that was corrosive to the public consciousness. That had to stop.

Television could not do this anymore. It was too strong, too real. No one individual could come across that way again.

The government and its media machine would have to build a castle and surround it with armed force in layers of protection. It would have to develop a new kind of language to pretend to a humanity that was on the way out.

That’s what they did, and it worked. It worked, at bottom, because it created a new audience that came to expect and demand three-dollar bills, one after another, standing in for the real thing.

In some humans, when you open their souls, you see fierce joy, oceanic energy and imagination. In others, you see dust, and a machinery that pretends to these things.

Knowing the difference makes all the difference in the world. The dust-and-machine people can voice the highest ideals and thoughts, but it’s all prerecorded.

Like media.

Especially when it’s live.

I’m sick in my heart

But I’m not a fool anymore,

I know the charade is over.

The schemers and liars brought us to this house

In the middle of the night

And told us what the world was.

I’m sick in my heart

But I’m not a fool anymore,

I know the charade is over.

The sellers and the buyers brought us to our knees,

But this is the end of the trance

That told us what the world was.

Between the clouds, the moon comes,

Between the clouds, the moon races,

New boiling rivers rush down from the mountains again.”

Jon Rappoport

The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

About these ads

Like this:

Like Loading…

April 22, 2013 Leave a reply

Uncategorized

Why Were Bomb Sniffing Dogs At Start & Finish Lines? – BlackListedNews.com

http://blacklistednews.com/

Why Were Bomb Sniffing Dogs At Start & Finish Lines?

Source: Daily Bail

Boston Police: “Don’t worry, it’s just a training exercise.”

Interview with college coach who noticed things weren’t normal before the race.

NBC 15 Mobile

Coach Saw Bomb Sniffing Dogs, Roof Spotters, Police Drills Before Explosion

University of Mobile’s Cross Country Coach, who was near the finish line of the Boston Marathon when a series of explosions went off, said he thought it was odd there were bomb sniffing dogs at the start and finish lines.

“They kept making announcements to the participants do not worry, it’s just a training exercise,” Coach Ali Stevenson told Local 15.

Stevenson said he saw law enforcement spotters on the roofs at the start of the race. He’s been in plenty of marathons in Chicago, D.C., Chicago, London and other major metropolitan areas but has never seen that level of security before.

“Evidently, I don’t believe they were just having a training exercise,” Stevenson said. “I think they must have had some sort of threat or suspicion called in.”

Uncategorized

FBI Interviewed Tamerlan Tsarnaev In Early 2011: Suspects’ Mother Claims FBI Set Up – BlackListedNews.com

http://blacklistednews.com/

FBI Interviewed Tamerlan Tsarnaev In Early 2011: Suspects’ Mother Claims FBI Set Up

Yesterday we reported that the initial, and largely expected, response by the father of the Boston bombing suspects, Anzor Tsarnaev, was that they had been set up by US secret services. As RT reported further, in an interview with Russian television the brothers’ father Anzor Tsarnaev also claimed that they are innocent and somebody might have set them up. “I’m sure about my children, in their purity. I don’t know what happened and who did this. God knows and he will punish them,” he told Zvezda channel. “Somebody might have set them up. I don’t know who and because of their cowardice killed the boy.”

The father said he was unable to contact his sons or other relatives. “Everything is switched off. I can’t reach my brother there either. I can’t reach anyone! I just want information. Now I fear for my boy, that they will now shoot him dead and then will say ‘He had a gun’.”

“I fear for my son, for his life. They should arrest him, bring him, but alive. Justice should investigate who is right and who is wrong,” he said.

Mr Tsarnaev recently spoke to his elder son, Tamerlan [Suspect #1], telling him that he should take care of his younger brother. Speaking of the Boston marathon bombing he told his son “Ok, Thanks to Allah you were not close to there and did not suffer.”

“I remember I even asked “Who could do something like that?”

“We just talked. I asked him about our Dzhokhar [Suspect #2], how was he. I told him, he should help him out and keep an eye on him, so that he studies well. I told him ‘You left school, got married too early, but the kid should finish [his education]’. Because this is life – those who don’t study work a lot and work hard. That’s why I was telling them study”.

* * *

As said up front: largely an expected reaction of shock and initial denial that one’s children ended up behaving in a less than anticipated fashion. So it was not unexpected that the mother also decided to go the conspiracy route, and allege the boys conduct was “set up” and that the FBI had been following them for years.

Again from RT:

Zubeidat Tsarnaeva maintains her younger son is innocent and like so many of the brothers’ acquaintances, claims they were good, courteous kids and model students – especially the younger 19-year-old Dzhokhar. A US citizen who is presently in the Russian Republic of Dagestan, she revealed to RT some suspicions of her own.

Grief-stricken at the latest developments in the case, Zubeidat expressed her dismay at the allegations, recounting Dzhokhar’s life in the US and talking of his status among his peers and friends: he was an honors student, loved by many of his friends and teachers. And his older brother Tamerlan was a star athlete and student, whose ambition was to one day appear on the US Olympic wrestling team.

But her biggest suspicion surrounding the case was the constant FBI surveillance she said her family was subjected to over the years. She is surprised that having been so stringent with the entire family, the FBI had no idea the sons were supposedly planning a terrorist act

They used to come [to our] home, they used to talk to me…they were telling me that he [the older, 26-y/o Tamerlan] was really an extremist leader and that they were afraid of him. They told me whatever information he is getting, he gets from these extremist sites… they were controlling him, they were controlling his every step…and now they say that this is a terrorist act! Never ever is this true, my sons are innocent!”

When asked if maybe she didn’t know about some of her sons’ more secret aspirations and dark secrets, she said “That’s impossible. My sons would never keep a secret.”

Finally, she said that if she could speak to her youngest – Dzhokhar, she would tell him, “Save your life and tell the truth, that you haven’t done anything, that this is a set up!”

A clip of the above:

More deranged appeals to some conspiracy theory involving the FBI? Possibly.

But then we learn that the FBI did indeed interview Tamerlan nearly two years ago. From AP:

A foreign government told the FBI in early 2011 about information that Tamerlan Tsarnaev (tsahr-NEYE’-ehv), one of the brothers suspected in the Boston Marathon bombings, was a follower of radical Islam.

Tamerlan Tsarnaev died in a shootout, and his younger brother was captured alive. They were identified by authorities and relatives as ethnic Chechens from southern Russia who had been in the U.S. for about a decade.

According to FBI, the foreign government said that based on its information, Tamerlan Tsarnaev was a strong believer and that he had changed drastically since 2010 as he prepared to leave the U.S. for travel to the country’s region to join unspecified underground groups.

The FBI says it interviewed Tsarnaev and relatives, and did not find any domestic or foreign terrorism activity.

It did? Because suddenly questions emerge:

  • What did the FBI inquiry involve?
  • What unspecified “underground groups”?
  • Have the same “underground groups” recruited more young people from Boston or neighboring cities?
  • Who made the decision to absolve Tamerlan of any suspicion?
  • Which “foreign government” demanded that the US FBI get involved in the life of a then 24 year old boy and under what pretext?
  • Also, and unrelated, why were both parents abroad?

Dead men tell not tales, and Tamerlan is now permanently muted, so it is the FBI’s word, as secret as it may, be against that of a dead man.

As for his brother: one wonders how quickly will he recuperate, or will his serious (or critical as was reported by Bloomberg) condition in hosptial suddenly deteriorate to a condition of just as terminal silence, thus tying up all the loose ends?