Steven Gaal

He sounded like another bullsh*t artist to me...especially his "military background" I concede that Tatum is a controversial character as are the stories of his life that he tells. There are numerous entries on Google for him. Here are three, one of which is a photostat of his military discharge document that lists his military background. http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.darkgovernment.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/MENA/TATUM/DD214.GIF&imgrefurl=http://www.darkgovernment.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/MENA/TATUM/tatum.html&h=1650&w=1271&sz=65&tbnid=g4BcNWKuiek18M:&tbnh=90&tbnw=69&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dchip%2Btatum%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=chip+tatum&docid=bBeXCpRw70OBLM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=DBJIT-_KEo2DsAKk-YTrCA&ved=0CD4Q9QEwBDgK&dur=5180 http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/138/1344/473971/ http://www.amazon.com/Joining-Club-Fed-Nancy-Tatum/dp/0964010445 In other words he was a proven xxxx (convicted fraudster) who in the late 80s early 90s was running a pool and golf course maintenance company. Odd career choice for someone who supposedly was a helicopter pilot. Steve - I have no idea what you think you link proves ++++++++++++++++++++ COLBY Odd career choice for someone who supposedly was a helicopter pilot. ------------------------------- Gee after reading the DOD document provided,I thought he was a pilot,not "supposedly". point #2 link showed people who knew him. point #3 You dont suppose the government would use selective prosecution on whistleblower ? NOPE, the government would never do that. http://undpwatch.blogspot.com/2011/05/demand-accountability-for-selective.html (NOPE NEVER) ++++++++++++++++

PART TWO of TWO POST RESPONSE (part ONE ABOVE) COLBY Let’s not be disingenuous, at least own up to backing the false flag theory.(post 14 this thread) ================================================================ COLBY latter So spell out your theory, is it that at Mossad’s behest a ‘handler’ from Jundallah directed some men from MEK to pull off an operation to frame Iran. And what evidence do have in support of that theory? Does go beyond a) Israel attempted a false flag op. in the 1950s meant to make Egypt appear unstable, supposedly some Mossad agents recently posed as CIA ones to recruit Jundallah c) an Iranian cleric in Thailand claimed, without any supporting evidence, the men were from MEK d) your mistaken belief the bomb maker had a Boluchi name, which would have made him Jundallah, not MEK, e) an Iranian government propaganda outlet claimed that Jundallah once claimed credit for an attack on a MEK TV station? Pretty weak! (post 22 this thread) ================================================================= Here you seem to list all my arguments in summary form. ----oooo--- Yet post 11 (mine GAAL) this thread had a link which stated the stongest evidence for false flag..... geopolitical . If Iran wanted to attack Israeli interests it would not be in countries it wanted/had good relationships with. Iran would attack in other countries,thus these attacks help Israel. Since in post 22 you ignored the strongest evidence I gave..in post 11.....disingenous is the correct term,but not for me but for.................YOU. ================================================================== POST 11 link POST 11 link WHAT COLBY IGNORES , ....on purpose ???????????????? link http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/02/who-carried-out-the-terrorist-car-bombings-in-india-thailand-and-georgia.html (post 11 link BTW i was my first post on this thread) Why Would Iran Bomb One of Its Most Important Trade Partners … Who Is Helping Iran to Escape from Sanctions By the West? India has become one of Iran’s most important trading partners, and has been increasing its ties to Iran since sanctions have been imposed by the West. Indeed, India has agreed to use creative payment methods for Iranian oil. See this, this, this and this. Why would Iran carry out a terror attack on one of its most important trading partners … one which has agreed to help help Iran escape from sanctions? As Finnian Cunninham notes: What would Iran gain from such action, only grief and trouble? This is especially true with regard to India and Thailand. Both Asian countries have become major trading partners with Tehran in recent years. India, along with China, is Iran’s biggest customer for its vital oil industry. Thailand is of growing importance as a trading partner with Iran for oil, mining, heavy industry, services, technology and agriculture especially after both countries set up a joint business council five years ago. For Iran to carry out such attacks, as is being claimed, would be like shooting itself in the foot, particularly because both Asian countries have refused to join in the US-led campaign to isolate Iran economically and diplomatically. Put the other way round, it is much more in the interest of Washington and Israel to destabilize relations between Iran and its Asian partners. The repercussions from the blasts in India would appear to be having that desired effect. Take this Reuters reports: Up to now India has not gone along with new financial sanctions imposed by the United States and European Union to punish Iran over its disputed nuclear programme. Instead, New Delhi has come up with elaborate trade and barter arrangements to pay for oil supplies. However, the president of the All India Rice Exporters’ Association said Monday’s attack on the wife of an Israeli diplomat in the Indian capital will damage trade with Iran and may complicate efforts to resolve an impasse over Iranian defaults on payments for rice imports worth around $150 million. “The attack and its political fallout have clearly vitiated the atmosphere. Traders who were already losing money due to payment defaults will be extremely wary of continuing their trade with buyers in Iran,” Vijay Setia told Reuters. So add it up. Bomb teams with proven US/Israeli assassination expertise and methodology; target countries that are major Iranian partners; desired effect of further isolating Iran internationally; and, to cap it all, a long sought-after pretext for Israel to attack Iran with America’s blessing. When logic and facts coincide like this, it’s usually more prudent to engage in reason than to indulge in lurid claims. Simiarly, Arshin Adib-Moghaddam writes in the Guardian: Let’s assume that sections of the military and security apparatus in Iran are responsible for the string of bombings in Georgia, Thailand and India. What would be the motive? The argument that Iran is retaliating for the murder of five civilian nuclear scientists in Iran is not plausible. If Iran wanted to target Israeli interests, it has other means at its disposal. It is hard to imagine that the Iranian government would send Iranian operatives to friendly countries, completely equipped with Iranian money and passports – making the case against them as obvious as possible. If the Iranian Revolutionary Guards are as professional, highly trained and politically savvy as we have been told repeatedly by Israeli politicians themselves, if they have successfully trained and equipped the cadres of Hezbollah and other movements with paramilitary wings in the region, then why would they launch such a clumsy and self-defeating operation? And why India, Georgia and Thailand, three countries that Iran has had cordial relations with during a period when Iran is facing increasing sanctions spearheaded by the United States? A few days ago, India agreed a rupee-based oil and gas deal with Iran and resisted US pressures to join the western boycott of the Iranian energy sector. As a net importer of 12% of Iranian oil, India’s total trade with Iran amounted to $13.67bn in 2010-2011. What would be the motive for damaging relations with one of Iran’s major trading partners and regional heavyweights? For Iran it doesn’t make sense to risk alienating India by launching an assassination attempt in the capital of the country. Similarly, Iran has good economic and political relations with Georgia and Thailand. Why would the leadership in Tehran risk a major crisis with these countries during this sensitive period when IAEA inspectors are moving in and out of Iran to investigate the country’s nuclear programme? And Juan Cole points out: India has suffered from both Hindu and Muslim terrorist groups. So the attack on an automobile outside the Israeli embassy in New Delhi could easily have been carried out by an Indian group. Israel’s government, a master of spin and propaganda, immediately blamed the bombing on Iran and Hizbullah. But there is no evidence for this cynical allegation, which makes no sense. India is Iran’s economic lifeline, and Tehran would not likely risk such an operation at this time. India gets 12% of its oil from Iran and sees an $8 billion annual export opportunity in filling the trade vacuum left by unilateral US and European boycotts of Iran. Contrary to a bad Reuters article, Indian officials denied Tuesday that the bombing would affect trade ties. (Logical because no evidence points to Iran.) Indian investigators are first rate. Based on the modus operandi, their initial thesis is that the attack was the work of the “Indian Mujahidin” group. [Cole is right.] It had used a similar remote controlled sticky bomb, placed by a motorcyclist, in an attack on Taiwanese tourists outside the Jama Masjid cathedral mosque in 2010. IM is a Sunni group, not connected to Iran, and doesn’t like Shiite Muslims (Iranians are Shiites). IM like other Sunni radicals support the Palestinians and they are unhappy with increasingly close ties between India and Israel. American media that just parrot notorious thug, Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman in this unlikely allegation are allowing themselves to be used for propaganda. Why not interview Indian authorities on this matter? They are on the ground and have excellent forensic (“CSI”) abilities. Stop being so lazy and blinkered; that isn’t journalism

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ http://forums.military.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/4960045241001/m/6350061212001 In general CIA assets have NO PROOF of any connection back to the agency. At most they will show a history for working for small obscure companies. sg

Pray for Iranian Pastor Sentenced to Death Pastor Yousef Nadarkhani has been sentenced to death by an Iranian court for converting from Islam to Christianity. He is guilty of apostasy under Islamic law. Christians like this are being persecuted for their faith all over the world. I will appear with Greta Van Susteren on the Fox News channel at 10 p.m. Eastern tonight to discuss Pastor Yousef and the global war against Christians. In Acts chapter 12, the Apostle Peter was in prison. The church prayed, and while they prayed God sent an angel and rescued him. Please forward this email to your family and friends so they can join us in praying for Pastor Yousef. Thank you and God bless you. Sincerely, Franklin Graham President, Samaritan's Purse Samaritan's Purse PO Box 3000, Boone NC 28607 828-262-1980 http://www.samaritanspurse.org

TWO POST RESPONSE THIS PART ONE --------------------v-------------- ================================== COLBY = Since you included the given name Javad twice and all capped it once I’m guessing you think it’s “a Boluchistan type name” but it’s not, it is typical of Azerbaijan and northwestern-central Iran. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Oh ! Azerbaijan !! Well .............Now it would be MIX and match. The fellow who would go to IRAN not MEK. The others link http://aangirfan.blogspot.com/2010/01/mossad-busy-in-malaysia.html PICKED by another country..... ----------====---------------------- From: total_truth_sciences Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 6:01 PM Subject: Mossad In Malaysia Mossad in Malaysia April 22, 2010 . On April 4, 2010 - Malaysia's internationally known politician, <http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&pagename=Zon... ish-Muslim_Affairs/MAELayout&cid=1181062677246> Anwar Ibrahim (born 1947), country's former Deputy Prime Minister (1993-98)and Finance Minister (1991-98) and currently the Opposition leader - claimed that Israeli intelligence agents (Mossad) have infiltrated into Malaysia's Bukit Aman (Federal Police headquarter in Kuala Lumpur). The espionage link to Israel is the company named Asiasoft Global Pte Ltd. (Singapore), which has worked as a sub-contractor to upgrade the telecommunication systems for the police. Two of the directors of the firm, Izhak David Nakar and Ido Schechter, are reportedly Israeli citizen. However, this is not the first time the 'Israeli connection' is raised. In 2008, then Malasian Home Minister had told the Parliament: "Then between November and December, a police report was lodged by the responsible police officers and investigated by one ASP Sairah. Then Sairah was transferred to Taiping and there was no news after that," The Malaysian Insider. How reliable is Anwar Ibrahim? Well, he is known for his good connections with the Jewish Lobby in the US through personal friendship and links to CIA-funded think tanks. In 2000, Malaysian politician Lim Kit Siang had asked former prime minister Dr. Mahathir Mohamad to declare the outcome of a three year police investigation to whether Anwar Ibrahim is a CIA operative. Anwar Ibrahim has been a good friend of former US Secretary of Defense under Bill Clinton administration, William S. Cohen (1997-2001), son of a Russian Jewish immigrant Reuben Cohen. No other Malaysian politician has forged such a relationship with individuals of the likes of Paul Wolfowitz, the former US Secretary of Defence and ex- President of the World Bank, who fervently believes that Israeli military dominance and power in the Middle East serves US interests. One of the principal advocates of the invasion and occupation of Iraq in furtherance of Israeli goals in the region, Wolfowitz was described by Anwar Ibrahim as his "great friend," a person in whom he has "faith," in a speech in the US on 19 June 2006. It seems now, Anwar Ibrahim is trying to turn the table on his old Zionist friends after being betrayed by Washington-based Zionist PR firm <http://freemalaysiatoday.com/fmt-english/opinion/comment/3892-apco-an... b-beneath-the-veil-of-public-relations> apco Worldwide, whose several directors are not only former Israeli high officials such as Shimon Shein , former Tel Aviv ambassador in Bonn, ItamarRabinovich and former Tel Aviv ambassador in Washington. Its CEO in Israel Gad Ben-Ari was a personal adviser to former PM Rabin. Speaking at 2003 OIC summit meeting in Malaysia in October 2003 - Malaysian prime minister Muhathir Mohamad while urged Muslim youth to abandon suicide attacks and apply their faith to strive in science and technology - he blamed Israel and its western allies for creating most of world's crisis and wars. Malaysia is a multicultural, multiracial and multireligion society ruled by a secular democratic government in which Muslims make a slight majority (60%). This makes easy for the Judeo-Christian foreign agents to incite communal clashes in Malaysia. Malaysia doesn't recognize Israel. Israeli professor Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi in his book, <http://books.google.ca/books?id=7v-g21ksdVsC&pg=PR7&lpg=PR7&dq=the+is... connection+-+the+book&source=bl&ots=V_4tucUsPT&sig=L0PI53Y1CSufdjs4T_4CV37M­U lI&hl=en&ei=QXXPS6-AIsOqlAedsJSgCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&v­e d=0CCAQ6AEwATgK#v=onepage&q=the israeli connection - the book&f=false> The Israeli Connection, wrote about Zionists' hatred toward the Muslim world and their support for anti-Muslim insurgencies and covert military and intelligence operations to destablize Muslim countries especially those which don't recognize the European Jewish occupation of Palestine. The book documents Tel Aviv's involvement in Iran-Cntra fiasco, French genocide of Algerian Muslims, aiding Idi Amin and Marcos against Moro Muslim resistance, collaborating with Chinese and Burmese genocide of Muslims in those countries. Currently Israeli Mossad is very active in India where it carried out the 2008 Mumbai terrorist false-flag operation; in Afghanistan, in Lebanon, in Pakistan, in Indonesia, in Pakistan, in Iran, in Nigeria, in Somalia, in Malaysia and many other Muslim countries. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ AS to Azerbaijan ....gee this unnamed country very active,very . http://presstv.com/detail/228055.html http://presstv.com/detail/209597.html http://presstv.com/detail/228080.html Azeri officials have contested Iranian claims that Azerbaijan has been assisting Israeli Mossad’s activities against Iran by allowing MEK members to travel through Azerbaijan and onto Israel to receive training related to the recent assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists. An Azeri foreign ministry spokesman said the Iranian complaint was likely in response to Azeri diplomatic protests over last month’s alleged Iranian plot to kill Israelis in Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan maintains friendly ties with the U.S. and Israel, while it long has had shaky relations with Iran over the ethnic Azeri minority in northern Iran. (BBC 02/13) ===================================================================== +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ===================================================================== How to Start a War: The American Use of War Pretext Incidents. by Richard Sanders Global Research, January 9, 2012 The following article by Richard Sanders published in May 2002, prior to the onslaught of the Iraq war, carefully documents the History of War Pretext Incidents. This historical review raises an important issue: Is the Pentagon seeking to trigger military confrontation in the Persian Gulf with a view to providing a pretext and a justification to waging an all out war on the Islamic Republic of Iran? As documented by Richard Sanders, this strategy has been used throughout American military history. With regard to the confrontation in the Persian Gulf, is the Obama administration prepared to sacrifice the Fifth Fleet based in Bahrain with a view to triggering public support for a war on Iran on the grounds of self-defense. Those opposed to war must address the issue of the "pretext"and "justification" to wage war. Of relevance, the "Responsibility to Protect under a NATO "humanitarian" mandate has also been used as a thematic pretext to wage war (Yugoslavia, Libya, Syria), The 911 Attacks and the "Global War on Terrorism" (Afghanistan, Somalia, Pakistan,...) not to mention the alleged "Weapons of Mass Destruction" (Iraq) have also been used to justify military intervention. Both 9/11 and WMD are being heralded as a justification for waging war on Iran, based on allegation that Iran was behind the 9/11 attacks and that Iran possesses nuclear weapons. In the words of Richard Sanders [2002]: "It is vitally important to expose this latest attempt [9/11] to fraudulently conceal the largely economic and geostrategic purposes of war. By asking who benefits from war, we can unmask its pretense and expose the true grounds for instigating it. By throwing light on repeated historical patterns of deception, we can promote skepticism about the government and media yarns that have been spun to encourage this war. The historical knowledge of how war planners have tricked people into supporting past wars, is like a vaccine. We can use this understanding of history to inoculate the public with healthy doses of distrust for official war pretext narratives and other deceptive stratagems. Through such immunization programs we may help to counter our society’s susceptibility to “war fever.” " Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, January 9, 2012 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- “Oh what a tangled web we weave, When first we practice to deceive!” Sir Walter Scott, Marmion. Canto vi. Stanza 17 Pretext n. [Latin praetextum, pp. of praetextere, to weave before, pretend, disguise; prae-, before + texere, to weave], a false reason or motive put forth to hide the real one; excuse. Stratagem [Gr. Strategema, device or act of a general; stratos, army + agein, to lead], a trick, scheme or device used for deceiving an enemy in war. Throughout history, war planners have used various forms of deception to trick their enemies. Because public support is so crucial to the process of initiating and waging war, the home population is also subject to deceitful stratagems. The creation of false excuses to justify going to war is a major first step in constructing public support for such deadly ventures. Perhaps the most common pretext for war is an apparently unprovoked enemy attack. Such attacks, however, are often fabricated, incited or deliberately allowed to occur. They are then exploited to arouse widespread public sympathy for the victims, demonize the attackers and build mass support for military “retaliation.” Like schoolyard bullies who shout ‘He hit me first!’, war planners know that it is irrelevant whether the opponent really did ‘throw the first punch.’ As long as it can be made to appear that the attack was unprovoked, the bully receives license to ‘respond’ with force. Bullies and war planners are experts at taunting, teasing and threatening their opponents. If the enemy cannot be goaded into ‘firing the first shot,’ it is easy enough to lie about what happened. Sometimes, that is sufficient to rationalize a schoolyard beating or a genocidal war. Such trickery has probably been employed by every military power throughout history. During the Roman empire, the causes of war -- cassus belli -- were often invented to conceal the real reasons for war. Over the millennia, although weapons and battle strategies have changed greatly, the deceitful strategem of using pretext incidents to ignite war has remained remarkably consistent. Pretext incidents, in themselves, are not sufficient to spark wars. Rumors and allegations about the tragic events must first spread throughout the target population. Constant repetition of the official version of what happened, spawns dramatic narratives that are lodged into public consciousness. The stories become accepted without question and legends are fostered. The corporate media is central to the success of such ‘psychological operations.’ Politicians rally people around the flag, lending their special oratory skills to the call for a military “response.” Demands for “retaliation” then ring out across the land, war hysteria mounts and, finally, a war is born. Every time the US has gone to war, pretext incidents have been used. Upon later examination, the conventional perception of these events is always challenged and eventually exposed as untrue. Historians, investigative journalists and many others, have cited eyewitness accounts, declassified documents and statements made by the perpetrators themselves to demonstrate that the provocative incidents were used as stratagems to stage-manage the march to war. Here are a few particularly blatant examples of this phenomenon. 1846: The Mexican-American War CONTEXT After Mexico’s revolution in 1821, Americans demanded about $3,000,000 in compensation for their losses.1 Mexico abolished slavery in 1829 and then prohibited further U.S. immigration into Texas, a Mexican state. In 1835, Mexico tried to enforce its authority over Texas. Texans, rallying under the slogan "Remember the Alamo!”, drove Mexican troops out of Texas and proclaimed independence. For nine years, many Texans lobbied for US annexation. This was delayed by northerners who opposed adding more slave territories to the US and feared a war with Mexico.2 In 1844, Democratic presidential candidate, James Polk, declared support for annexing Texas and won with the thinnest margin ever.3 The following year, Texas was annexed and Mexico broke off diplomatic relations with the US. Polk sent John Slidell to Mexico offering $25 million for New Mexico, California and an agreement accepting the Rio Grande boundary. Mexican government officials refused to meet the envoy.4 PRETEXT John Stockwell, a Texan who led the CIA’s covert 1970s war in Angola, summed up the start of Mexican American war by saying “they offered two dollars-a-head to every soldier who would enlist. They didn't get enough takers, so they offered a hundred acres to anyone who would be a veteran of that war. They still didn't get enough takers, so [General] Zachary Taylor was sent down to parade up and down the border -- the disputed border -- until the Mexicans fired on him.... And the nation rose up, and we fought the war.”5 President Polk hoped that sending General Taylor’s 3,500 soldiers into Mexico territory, would provoke an attack against US troops.6 “On May 8, 1846, Polk met with his Cabinet at the White House and told them that if the Mexican army attacked the U.S. forces, he was going to send a message to Congress asking for a declaration of war. It was decided that war should be declared in three days even if there was no attack.”7 When news of the skirmish arrived, Polk sent a message to Congress on May 11: “Mexico has passed the boundary of the U.S. and shed American blood on American soil.”8 Two days later Congress declared war on Mexico.9 RESPONSE Newspapers helped the push for war with headlines like: “‘Mexicans Killing our Boys in Texas.’10 With public support secured, U.S. forces occupied New Mexico and California. US troops fought battles across Mexico and stormed their capital. A new more US-friendly government quickly emerged. It signed over California and New Mexico for $15 million and recognized the Rio Grande as their border with the US state of Texas.11 General Taylor became an American war hero and he rode his victory straight into the White House by succeeding Polk as president in 1849. REAL REASONS The US secured over 500,000 square miles from Mexico, including Texas, Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona, California and parts of Colorado and Wyoming. The war was a boon to US nationalism, it boosted popular support for a very weak president and added vast new territories to the US where slavery was allowed. 1898: The Spanish-American War CONTEXT Cubans fought several wars to free themselves from Spanish colonial rule, including 1868-1878, 1879-1880 and 1895-1898.12 In 1898, Cubans were on the brink of finally winning their independence. The US government agreed to respect Cuba’s sovereignty and promised they would not step in. "On January 24, [1898] on the pretext of protecting the life and safety of Mr. Lee, U.S. consul in Havana, and other U.S. citizens in the face of street disturbances provoked by Spanish extremists, the Maine battleship entered the bay of Havana.”13 PRETEXT On February 15, 1898, a huge explosion sank the USS Maine killing 266 of its crew.14 In 1975, an investigation led by US Admiral Hyman Rickover concluded that there was no evidence of any external explosion. The explosion was internal, probably caused by a coal dust explosion. Oddly, the ship's weapons and explosives were stored next to the coal bunker.15 RESPONSE The Maine’s commander cautioned against assumptions of an enemy attack. The press denounced him for "refusing to see the obvious." The Atlantic Monthly said anyone thinking this was not a premeditated, Spanish act of war was "completely at defiance of the laws of probability."16 Newspapers ran wild headlines like: “Spanish Cannibalism,” “Inhuman Torture,” “Amazon Warriors Fight For Rebels.”17 Guillermo Jimpnez Soler notes: “As would become its usual practice, U.S. intervention in the war was preceded by intensive press campaigns which incited jingoism, pandering to the most shameless tales and sensationalism and exacerbated cheap sentimentality. Joseph Pulitzer of The World and William Randolph Hearst from The Journal, the two largest U.S. papers... carried their rivalry to a paroxysm of inflaming public opinion with scandalous, provocative and imaginary stories designed to win acceptance of U.S. participation in the first of its holy wars beyond its maritime borders.”18 US papers sent hundreds of reporters and photographers to cover the apparent Spanish attacks. Upon arrival, many were disappointed. Frederick Remington wrote to Hearst saying: “There is no war .... Request to be recalled.” Hearst’s now-famous cable replied: "Please remain. You furnish the pictures, I'll furnish the war." For weeks, The Journal dedicated more than eight pages per day to the explosion.19 Through ceaseless repetition, a rallying cry for retaliation grew into a roar. “In the papers, on the streets and in…Congress. The slogan was "Remember the Maine! To hell with Spain."20 With the US public and government safely onboard, the US set sail for war launching an era of ‘gunboat diplomacy.’ Anti-war sentiments were drowned out by the sea of cries for war. On April 25, 1898, the US Congress declared war on Spain. REAL REASONS Within four months “the US replaced Spain as the colonial power in the Philippines, Guam and Puerto Rico, and devised a special status for Cuba. Never again would the US achieve so much…as in that ‘splendid little war,’ as…described at the time by John Hay, future secretary of state.”21 Historian Howard Zinn has said that 1898 heralded “the most dramatic entrance onto the world scene of American military and economic power.… The war ushered in what Henry Luce later referred to as the American Century, which really meant a century of American domination.”22 1915: World War I CONTEXT In 1915, Europe was embroiled in war, but US public sentiment opposed involvement. President Woodrow Wilson said they would “remain neutral in fact as well as in name.”23 PRETEXT On May 7, 1915, a German submarine (U-boat) sank the Lusitania, a British passenger ship killing 1,198, including 128 Americans.24 The public was not told that passengers were, in effect, a ‘human shield’ protecting six million rounds of US ammunition bound for Britain.25 To Germany, the ship was a threat. To Britain, it was bait for luring an attack. Why? British Admiralty leader, Winston Churchill, had already commissioned “a study to determine the political impact if an ocean liner were sunk with Americans on board.”26 A week before the incident, Churchill wrote to the Board of Trade’s president saying it is “most important to attract neutral shipping to our shores, in the hopes especially of embroiling the U.S. with Germany.”27 British Naval Intelligence Commander, Joseph Kenworthy, said: “The Lusitania was sent at considerably reduced speed into an area where a U-boat was known to be waiting and with her escorts withdrawn.”28 Patrick Beesly’s history of British naval intelligence in WWI, notes: "no effective steps were taken to protect the Lusitania.” British complicity is furthered by their foreknowledge that: · U-boat commanders knew of the Lusitania’s route, · a U-boat that had sunk two ships in recent days was in the path of the Lusitania, · although destroyers were available, none escorted the Lusitania or hunted for U-boats, · the Lusitania was not given specific warnings of these threats.29 RESPONSE US newspapers aroused outrage against Germany for ruthlessly killing defenceless Americans. The US was being drawn into the war. In June 1916, Congress increased the size of the army. In September, Congress allocated $7 billion for national defense, “the largest sum appropriated to that time.”30 In January 1917, the British said they had intercepted a German message to Mexico seeking an alliance with the US and offering to help Mexico recover land ceded to the US. On April 2, Wilson told Congress: “The world must be safe for democracy.” Four days later the US declared war on Germany.31 REAL REASONS Influential British military, political and business interests wanted US help in their war with Germany. Beesly concludes that “there was a conspiracy deliberately to put the Lusitania at risk in the hope that even an abortive attack on her would bring the U.S. into the war.”32 Churchill’s memoirs of WWI state: "There are many kinds of maneuvres in war, some only of which take place on the battlefield.... The maneuvre which brings an ally into the field is as serviceable as that which wins a great battle."33 In WWI, rival imperialist powers struggled for bigger portions of the colonial pie. “They were fighting over boundaries, colonies, spheres of influence; they were competing for Alsace-Lorraine, the Balkans, Africa and the Middle East.”34 US war planners wanted a piece of the action. "War is the health of the state," said Randolph Bourne during WWI. Zinn explains: “Governments flourished, patriotism bloomed, class struggle was stilled.”35 1941: World War II CONTEXT US fascists opposed President Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR) from the start. In 1933, “America's richest businessmen were in a panic. Roosevelt intended to conduct a massive redistribution of wealth…[and it] had to be stopped at all costs. The answer was a military coup…secretly financed and organized by leading officers of the Morgan and du Pont empires.”36 A top Wall Street conspirator said: "We need a fascist government in this country…to save the nation from the communists who want to tear it down and wreck all that we have built.”37 The Committee on Un-American Activities said: “Sworn testimony showed that the plotters represented notable families -- Rockefeller, Mellon, Pew, Pitcairn, Hutton and great enterprises -- Morgan, Dupont, Remington, Anaconda, Bethlehem, Goodyear, GMC, Swift, Sun.”38 FDR also faced “isolationist” sentiments from such millionaires who shared Hitler’s hatred of communism and had financed Hitler’s rise to power as George Herbert Walker and Prescott Bush, predecessors of the current president.39 William R.Hearst, mid-wife of the war with Spain, opposed a war against fascism. Hearst employed Hitler, Mussolini and Goering as writers. He met Hitler in 1934 and used Readers’ Digest and his 33 newspapers to support fascism.40 PRETEXT On December 7, 1941, Japanese bombers attacked the US Pacific Fleet in Pearl Harbour, Hawaii, killing about 2,460.41 FDR, and his closest advisors, not only knew of the attack in advance and did not prevent it, they had actually provoked it. Lt. Arthur McCollum, head of the Far East desk for U.S. Navy intelligence, wrote a detailed eight-step plan on October 7, 1940 that was designed to provoke an attack.42 FDR immediately set the covert plan in motion. Soon after implementing the final step, Japan attacked Pearl Harbour. After meeting FDR on October 16, 1941, Secretary of War Henry Stimson wrote: "We face the delicate question of the diplomatic fencing to be done so as to be sure Japan is put into the wrong and makes the first bad move -- overt move.” On November 25, after another meeting with FDR, Stimson wrote: "The question was: how we should maneuver them [the Japanese] into the position of firing the first shot.”43 The next day, an insulting “ultimatum” was delivered to the Japanese. The US intercepted a coded Japanese cable calling the ultimatum a “humiliating proposal” and saying they would now prepare for war with the US.44 The US had cracked Japanese diplomatic and military codes.45 A Top Secret Army Board report (October 1944), shows that the US military knew “the probable exact hour and date of the attack.”46 On November 29, 1941, the Secretary of State revealed to a reporter that the attack’s time and place was known. This foreknowledge was reported in the New York Times (Dec. 8, 1941).47 RESPONSE After Pearl Harbour, the US quickly declared war against Japan. With media support, “Remember Pearl Harbour!” became an American rallying cry. On December 11, Germany and Italy declared war on the US. As the war wound down, decoded messages revelaed to the US military that Japan would soon surrender. They knew the atomic destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was unnecessary. Although nuclear weapons are commonly believed to have ended WWII, they were an opening salvo in the Cold War against the USSR. REAL REASONS The US used WWII to maneuver itself into a position of superiority over former imperial rivals in Europe. In Parenti’s words the US “became the prime purveyor and guardian of global capitalism.”48 As the only nation wielding nuclear weapons, the US also became the world’s sole superpower. 1950: The Korean War CONTEXT There is “extensive evidence of U.S. crimes against peace and crimes against humanity” KWCT committed after they occupied southern Korea in September 1945. The US worked to “create a police state…using many former collaborators with Japanese rule, provoke tension…between southern and northern Korea, opposing and disrupting any plans for peaceful reunification. The U.S. trained, directed and supported ROK [south Korea] in systematic murder, imprisonment, torture, surveillance, harassment and violations of human rights of hundreds of thousands…, especially…nationalists, leftists, peasants seeking land reform, union organizers and/or those sympathetic to the north.”49 University of Hawaii professor, Oliver Lee, notes a “long pattern of South Korean incursions” into the north. In 1949, there were more than 400 border engagements. A US Army document states: “Some of the bloodiest engagements were caused by South Korean units securing and preparing defensive positions that were either astride or north of the 38th parallel. This provoked violent North Korean actions.”50 PRETEXT On June 25, 1950, the North Korean military were said to have moved three miles into South Korea territory. Dr. Channing Liem, the former South Korean ambassador to the UN (1960-1961) wrote: “For Washington, the question, ‘who fired the first shot?’ carried special significance…. Assistant Secretary of State for UN Affairs…[revealed] before the Senate Appropriations Committee, 1950, the US had devised a plan prior to the start of the war to gain approval from the UN to send its troops to Korea under the UN flag in the event that South Korea was attacked. It was imperative, therefore, that the ‘first shot’ be fired by the North, or at least that such an argument could be made.”51 ROK President Syngman Rhee triggered the war “with behind the scene support of John Foster Dulles,” the former-U.S. Secretary of State who met Rhee (June 18, 1950) just days before the pretext incident. Dulles told Rhee that “if he was ready to attack the communist North, the U.S. would lend help, through the UN…. He advised Rhee…to persuade the world that the ROK was attacked first, and to plan his actions accordingly.”52 Albert Einstein told Liem in 1955 that “the US was manipulating the UN…. [it] was being exploited by the great powers at the expense of the small nations…. He went on to say great powers do not act on the basis of facts only but manufacture the facts to serve their purposes and force their will on smaller nations.”53 I.F.Stone was perhaps the first to expose how a US diplomat deceived the UN Secretary General into believing there had been an unprovoked North Korean attack.54 North Korea claimed the attack began two days earlier when ROK divisions launched a six-hour artillery attack and then pushed 1 or 2 kilometers across the border. They responded to “halt the enemy's advance and go over to a decisive counterattack.”55 RESPONSE Secretary of State, Dean Acheson was “quick to seize the opportunity to blame the war on North Korea regardless of the evidence.” North Korea was accused of “brutal, unprovoked aggression.”56 The public was told that this ‘invasion’ was the first step in Soviet plans for world domination. Anyone opposing the war was called a communist. McCarthyism was on. On June 27, 1950, Truman orders US troops to support South Korea, Congress agrees and the UN Security Council approves the plan.57 About three million civilians were killed, two-thirds in North Korea.58 REAL REASONS To maintain power, South Korea required major US military support. One month before the pretext, Rhee suffered a terrible electoral defeat. Opposing North Korea, diverted public attention from Rhee’s repression to the communist north. The war was used to triple the Pentagon budget, boost NATO’s military build-up and create a new military role for the UN that could be manipulated by the US. 1964: The Vietnam War CONTEXT Long before WWII, Vietnamese fought for independence from French Indochina. Resistance continued when Japanese troops occupied the colony during the war. Much of the region reverted to French control after the war. As early as 1950, the US aided French efforts to defeat the Ho Chi Minh’s revolutionary forces. When France lost a decisive battle in 1954, the Geneva Accord recognized the independence of Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. Vietnam was “temporarily” divided. Ngo Dinh Diem’s repressive regime in South Vietnam was backed by thousands of US military “advisors.” A military coup overthrew Diem in November 1963.59 That same month, President Kennedy -- who had resisted escalating the war -- was assassinated. President Johnson took power and began intensified US involvement in Vietnam. PRETEXT On July 30, 1964, enemy torpedo boats supposedly attacked a US destroyer, the USS Maddox, in North Vietnam’s Gulf of Tonkin. This lie of an “unprovoked attack” against a “routine patrol” threw the U.S. headlong into war. The Maddox was actually involved in “aggressive intelligence gathering in coordination with actual attacks by South Vietnam and the Laotian Air Force against targets in North Vietnam.”60 They wanted to provoke a response “but the North Vietnamese wouldn't bite. So, Johnson invented the attack.”61 The US task force commander for the Gulf of Tonkin “cabled Washington that the report was the result of an ‘over-eager’ sonarman who picked up the sounds of his own ship's screws and panicked.”62 RESPONSE On August 5, 1964, although he knew the attack had not occurred, Johnson couldn’t resist this opportunity for a full-scale war. Johnson went on national TV to lie about the Tonkin incident and to announce a bombing campaign to “retaliate.” The media repeated the lie ad nauseum. The fabricated assault was “used as justification for goading Congress into granting the president the authorization to initiate a protracted and highly lucrative war with North Vietnam.”63 Johnson asked Congress for powers “to take all necessary measures to repel any armed attack against the forces of the US and to prevent further aggression.”64 Before the war ended in 1975, about four million in Southeast Asia were killed. REAL REASONS As during the Spanish-American war, the American business elite sought to acquire colonies from failing imperial powers. President Dwight Eisenhower propounded the ‘Domino Theory’ in 1954.65 If South Vietnam ‘fell,’ then other countries would too, ‘like a set of dominos.’ The Vietnam War was a threat to all revolutionaries and their supporters. The war also gave a huge boost to US war industries. Other US corporations wanted access to region’s markets and resources, like tin, tungsten, rubber.66 1983: The Invasion of Grenada CONTEXT For decades, Eric Gairy dominated the tiny British colony of Grenada. Gairy “a vicious dictator…[was] the only Caribbean leader to maintain diplomatic relations with Pinochet’s Chile.” When his “notorious security forces” returned from training in Chile “‘disappearances’ became frequent.”67 ‘Gariyism’ was so bad that when Britain offered independence, Grenadans united to “shut down the country…prior to Independence Day, February 7, 1974."68 The New Jewel Movement (NJM) led a successful uprising on March 13, 1979. The NJM “organized agrarian reform…, expanded trade union rights, advanced women's equality…, established literacy programs and instituted free medical care.”69 The CIA "relentlessly used every trick in its dirty bag” including "an unending campaign of economic, psychological and openly violent destabilization." Reagan met Caribbean leaders, the US urged "regional governments to consider military action" and CIA chief, William Casey, met Senate Intelligence Committee members "to discuss CIA involvement." Gairy began “recruiting mercenaries from…the Cuban exile community in Miami.”70 (ER BS p.3-5) In October1981, a US military exercise simulated an invasion of Grenada ostensibly to rescue Americans and "install a regime favorable to the way of life we espouse."71 In March 1983, Reagan exclaimed on TV that Grenada’s tourist airport threatened US oil supply routes.72 On October 19, 1983, NJM leader Maurice Bishop, and others, were put under house arrest during an coup by NJM’s Deputy PM Bernard Coard. Oddly, they were freed by a "well organized crowd…including counter-revolutionary elements…with anti-communist banners…. [led by] well known businessmen…. Who organized this rally, planned so well, and in advance?" Freed NJM leaders were whisked away and as a “crowd gathered…the soldiers, apparently panicked by explosions, opened fire.… something provoked them, leading to a massacre." NJM leaders surrendered to soldiers and were soon executed.73 Significantly, "Pentagon officials informed Members of Congress that they had known of the impending coup…two weeks in advance."74 The coup plotters were charged with the murders but their lawyer, former US Attorney General Ramsey Clarke believe them innocent of the murders.75 It seems the coup was hijacked by US interests to kill some NJM leaders, jail the rest and set the stage for an invasion. PRETEXT In his Naval Science course, Captain M.T.Carson lists the invasion’s "stated reasons" as "protect Americans, eliminate hostage potential; restore order; requested by OECS [Organization of Eastern Caribbean States]."76 The US helped form the OECS, and then got it and the Grenadan governor to "request" an invasion. Under “potential problem,” Carson notes "Act fast with surprise and present world with fait accompli. If not, world opinion of U.S. invasion of tiny country will be critical. So: · “Get OECS to request action.” · “Get Governor Scoon to request action.” · “Emphasize students-in-danger aspect"77 Carson quotes a "medical school official": "Our safety was never in danger. We were used as an excuse by this government to invade…. They needed a reason…and we were it." MTC Most students "insisted” that they were “not…in any danger before the US invasion; only afterwards."78 RESPONSE On October 22, 1983, "Operation Urgent Fury" was ordered.79 Three days later, the invasion hit like a cyclone. The Organization of American States "deeply deplored" the invasion and the UN Security Council voted 11 to 1 against it.80 REAL REASONS Grenada threatened the US by providing a powerful example of viable alternative ways to organize social, political and economic structures. Carson lists these reasons: · "Chance to eliminate Communist regime and replace with pro-U.S. government” · “Demonstrate U.S. military capabilities” · “President Reagan commented that U.S. military forces were back on their feet and standing tall."81 US military morale was damaged two days before the invasion when 241 Marines were killed in Lebanon.82 The Wall Street Journal said the invasion made Grenada a "haven for offshore banks."83 1989: The Invasion of Panama CONTEXT The Panama Canal has dominated Panama’s history. US military invasions and interventions occurred in 1895, 1901-1903, 1908, 1912, 1918-1920, 1925, 1950, 1958, 1964 and 1989.84 In November 1903, US troops ensured Panama’s secession from Colombia. Within days, a treaty gave the US permanent and exclusive control of the canal.85 Former Panamanian military leader, Manuel Noriega, recruited by US military intelligence in 1959, attended the US Army School of the Americas in 1967 and led Panama’s military intelligence the next year. By 1975, the US Drug Enforcement Agency knew of Noriega’s drug dealing. He met, then-CIA Director, George Bush in 1976.86 In 1977, Presidents Jimmy Carter and Omar Torrijos, signed a treaty to return the canal to Panamanian control in 1999. Other Americans undermined the treaty using “diplomatic…and political pressure, through to economic aggression and military invasion.”87 In the early-1980s, Noriega’s drug smuggling helped fund the contras in Nicaragua. He took control of Panama’s National Guard in 1983 and helped rig elections in 1984. Falling from US favour, the US indicted Noriega for drug crimes in 1988.88 On April 14, 1988, Reagan invoked “war powers” against Panama. In May, the Assistant Defense Secretary told the Senate: “I don’t think anyone has totally discarded the use of force.”89 PRETEXT On December 16, 1989, there was what media called an “unprovoked attack on a US soldier who did not return fire.”90 The soldier was killed when driving “through a military roadblock near a sensitive military area.”91 Panama’s government said “U.S. officers…fired at a military headquarters, wounding a soldier and…a 1-year-old girl. A wounded Panamanian soldier…confirmed this account to U.S. reporters.”92 The wife of a US officer was reportedly arrested and beaten. RESPONSE George Bush called the attack on US soldiers an “enormous outrage”93 and said he “would not stand by while American womanhood is threatened.”94 Noam Chomsky questions why Bush “stood by” when a US nun was kidnapped and sexually abused by Guatemalan police only weeks earlier, when two US nuns were killed by contras in Nicaragua on January 1, 1990, and when a US nun was wounded by gunmen in El Salvador around the same time.95 The US media demonized Noriega and turned the “‘Noriega’ issue into an accepted justification for the invasion…. Colonel Eduardo Herrera, ex-Director of [Panama’s] ‘Public Forces,’…said: “If the real interest of the US was to capture Noriega, they could have done so on numerous occasions. [They] had all of his movements completely controlled.”96 On December 20, 1989, “Operation Just Cause” began. More than 4,000 were killed. US crimes included indiscriminate attacks, extra judicial executions, arbitrary detentions, destruction of property (like leveling the Chorrillo neighborhood), use of prohibited weapons, erasing evidence and mass burials.97 A US-friendly president, Guillermo Endara, was soon sworn in on a US military base. REAL REASONS The Carter-Torrijos Treaty was torn up and the Panama’s military was dismantled. A right-wing, US think tank stated in 1988 that: “once [Panama] is controlled by a democratic regime….discussions should begin with respect to a realistic defense of the Canal after…2000. These discussions should include the maintenance, by the US, of a limited number of military installations in Panama…to maintain adequate projection of force in the western hemisphere.”98 The invasion was a testing ground for new weapons, such as the B-2 bomber (worth US $2.2 billion) that was used for the first time. The invasion also: · rectified “Bush's ‘wimpy’ foreign relations image” · gave a “spectacular show of U.S. military might in the final months before the Nicaraguan elections, hinting…that they might want to vote for the ‘right’ candidate.” · “sent a signal…that the US…[would] intervene militarily where the control of illegal drugs was ostensibly at stake. · “demonstrated the new U.S. willingness to assume active, interventionist leadership of the ‘new world order’ in the post-Cold War period.”99 CONCLUSIONS There are dozens of other examples from US history besides those summarized here. The “Cold War” was characterized by dozens of covert and overt wars throughout the Third World. Although each had its specific pretexts, the eradication of communism was the generally-used backdrop for all rationales.100 Since the Soviet Union’s demise, US war planners have continued to use spectacular pretext incidents to spawn wars. Examples include Iraq (1991), Somalia (1992), Haiti (1994), Bosnia (1995) and Yugoslavia (1999). Throughout this time, the US “War on Drugs” has been fought on many fronts. Lurking behind the excuse to squash illicit drug trafficking, are the actual reasons for financing, training and arming right-wing, US-backed regimes, whose officials have so often profited from this illegal trade. The CIA has used this trade to finance many of its covert wars.101 The “War on Drugs” has targeted numerous countries to strengthen counter-insurgency operations aimed at destroying opposition groups that oppose US corporate rule. Military plotters know that the majority would never support their wars, if it were generally known why they were really being fought. Over the millennia, a special martial art has been deliberately developed to weave elaborate webs of deceit to create the appearance that wars are fought for “just” or “humanitarian” reasons. If asked to support a war so a small, wealthy elite could shamelessly profit by ruthlessly exploiting and plundering the natural and human resources in far away lands, people would ‘just say no.’ We now face another broad thematic pretext for war, the so-called “War Against Terrorism.” We are told it will be waged in many countries and may continue for generations. It is vitally important to expose this latest attempt to fraudulently conceal the largely economic and geostrategic purposes of war. By asking who benefits from war, we can unmask its pretense and expose the true grounds for instigating it. By throwing light on repeated historical patterns of deception, we can promote skepticism about the government and media yarns that have been spun to encourage this war. The historical knowledge of how war planners have tricked people into supporting past wars, is like a vaccine. We can use this understanding of history to inoculate the public with healthy doses of distrust for official war pretext narratives and other deceptive stratagems. Through such immunization programs we may help to counter our society’s susceptibility to “war fever.” Notes 1. “History of Mexico, Empire and Early Republic, 1821-55,” Area Handbook, US Library of Congress. 2. Shayne M. Cokerdem, “Unit Plan: Manifest Destiny and The Road to the Civil War.” 3. P.B.Kunhardt, Jr., P.B.Kunhardt III, P.W.Kunhardt, “James Polk,” The American President, 2000. 4. “Diplomatic Approaches: U.S. Relations with Mexico: 1844-1846,” LearnCalifornia.org, 2000. 5. John Stockwell, “The CIA and the Gulf War,” Speech, Santa Cruz, CA, Feb.20, 1991, aired by John DiNardo, Pacifica Radio. 6. Betsy Powers, “The U.S.-Mexican War of 1846-48,” War, Reconstruction and Recovery in Brazoria County. 7. “The White House and Western Expansion,” Learning Center, White House Historical Association. 8. Powers 9. White House Historical Association 10. Stockwell 11. P.B.Kunhardt, Jr., P.B.Kunhardt III, P.W.Kunhardt 12. Ed Elizondo, “History of the Cuban Liberation Wars,” Oct.2, 2001. 13. Guillermo Jimpnez Soler, "The emergence of the United States as a world power", Granma International, Aug.7, 1998. 14. Bill Sardi, “Remember the Maine! And the Other Ships Sunk to Start a War” Oct.16, 2000. 15. Michael Rivero, “Dictatorship through Deception,” New Republic Forum, Dec.24, 1999. 16. Rivero 17. J. Buschini, “The Spanish-American War,” Small Planet Communications, 2000. 18. Soler 19. Buschini 20. Buschini 21. Soler 22. Howard Zinn, “History as a Political Act,” Revolutionary Worker, December 20, 1998. 23. Woodrow Wilson, Message to Congress, Aug. 19, 1914, Senate Doc.#566, pp.3-4, World War I Document Archive. 24. Greg D.Feldmeth, “The First World War,” U.S. History Resources, Mar.31, 1998. 25. James Perloff, “Pearl Harbor,” The New American, Vol. 2, No. 30, December 8, 1986. 26. James Perloff 27. Winston Churchill, cited by Ralph Raico, “Rethinking Churchill,” The Costs of War: America's Pyrrhic Victories, 1997. 28. Harry V.Jaffa, “The Sinking of the Lusitania: Brutality, Bungling or Betrayal?” The Churchill Center. 29. Patrick Beesly, Room 40: British Naval Intelligence, 1914-18, 1982 cited by RR 30. Peter Young, “World War I,” World Book Encyclopedia, 1967, pp. 374-375. 31. Wendy Mercurio, “WWI Notes, From Neutrality to War,” Jan.2002. 32. Patrick Beesly, cited by Ralph Raico 33. Winston Churchill, cited by Ralph Raico 34. Howard Zinn, “War Is the Health of the State,” A People's History of the United States, 1492-Present, Sept. 2001. 35. Zinn 36. Steve Kangas, “The Business Plot to Overthrow Roosevelt,” Liberalism Resurgent: A Response to the Right, 1996. 37. Gerald MacGuire, cited by Steve Kangas 38. Dale Wharton, Book review of The Plot to Seize the White House (1973) by Jules Archer, Eclectica Book Reviews. 39. Webster G.Tarpley and Anton Chaitkin, “The Hitler Project,” George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography, 1992. 40. David Nasaw, “Remembering ‘The Chief,’" interview, Newshour, Sept.7, 2000. 41. Joseph Czarnecki, Richard Worth, Matthias C. Noch and Tony DiGiulian, “Attack on Pearl Harbor, 7 December 1941,” The Battles Of The Pacific. 42. Steve Fry, “Author: FDR knew attack was coming,” The Capital-Journal, June 12, 2001. 43. Henry Stimson, cited by Robert Stinnett, Day of Deceit: The Truth about FDR and Pearl Harbour, 2000. 44. Percy L.Greaves, Jr., “What We Knew,” Institute for Historical Review, Winter, 1983, p.467. 45. “The MAGIC Documents: Summaries and Transcripts of the Top-Secret Diplomatic Communications of Japan, 1938-1945,” GB 0099 KCLMA MF 388-401. 46. Paul Proteus, “Part One: Pearl Harbour,” America's Phoney Wars. 47. Rivero 48. Michael Parenti, Against Empire, 1995, p.36. 49. “Final Judgement of the Korea International War Crimes Tribunal,” June 23, 2001. 50. Oliver Lee, "South Korea Likely Provoked War with North," Star-Bulletin, June 24, 1994. 51. Channing Liem, The Korean War (6.25, 1950 - 7.27, 1953) - An Unanswered Question, 1993. 52. Liem 53. Albert Einstein cited by Channing Liem. 54. I.F.Stone, Hidden History of the Korean War, 1952, cited by Channing Liem. 55. Liem 56. Lee 57. Jim Caldwell, “Korea - 50 years ago this week, June 25-28, 1950,” ArmyLINK News, June 20, 2000. 58. Jon Halliday and Bruce Cumings, Korea: The Unknown War, 1988, p.200, cited by Robin Miller, “Washington's Own Love Affair with Terror” 59. Sandra M.Wittman, “Chronology of US-Vietnamese Relations,” Vietnam: Yesterday and Today. 60. Rivero 61. John DiNardo, “The CIA and the Gulf War,” aired by Pacifica Radio. 62. Rivero 63. DiNardo 64. Joint Resolution, U.S. Congress, Aug.7, 1964, “The Tonkin Bay Resolution, 1964,” Modern History Sourcebook, July 1998. 65. Dwight D. Eisenhower, “Domino Theory Principle, 1954,” Public Papers of the Presidents, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1954, pp.381-390. (News Conference, April 7, 1954.) 66. Eisenhower 67. Ellen Ray and Bill Schaap, “US Crushes Caribbean Jewel.” Covert Action Information Bulletin (CAIB), winter 1984, p.8 68. Jeff Hackett, “Burying ‘Gairyism.’” Bibliographies 69. Preface to Maurice Bishop speech “In Nobody's Backyard,” April 13, 1979, The Militant, Mar.15 1999. 70. Ray and Schaap, pp.3-5 71. Ray and Schaap, p.6 72. Clarence Lusane, “Grenada, Airport ’83: Reagan’s Big Lie,” CAIB, Spring-Summer 1983, p.29. 73. Ray and Schaap, pp.10-11 74. Ray and Schaap, p.5 75. Alan Scott, "The Last Prisoners of the Cold War Are Black," letter, The Voice (Grenada), April 20, 2001. 76. Capt. M.T.Carson, USMC, (Marine Officer Instructor), “Grenada October 1983,” History of Amphibious Warfare (Naval Science 293), Naval Reserves Officer Training Corps, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign. 77. Carson 78. Ray and Schaap, p..8. 79. Carson 80. “Failures of U.S. Foreign Policy,” Alternativeinsight, Sept.1, 2001 81. Carson 82. Alternativeinsight, Sept.1, 2001 83. Anthony Arnove and Alan Maass, “Washington’s war crimes,” Socialist Worker, Nov.16, 2001. 84. Zoltan Grossman, “One Hundred Years of Intervention,” 2001. 85. Commission for the Defence of Human Rights in Latin America (CODEHUCA), This is the Just Cause, 1990, p.115. 86. Richard Sanders, “Manuel Noriega,” Press for Conversion!, Dec. 2000, p.40. 87. CODEHUCA, pp.117, 108 88. Sanders 89. CODEHUCA, p.108 90. Richard K. Moore, “The Police State Conspiracy an Indictment,” New Dawn Magazine, Jan.-Dec. 1998. 91. Noam Chomsky, “Operation Just Cause: the Pretexts,” Deterring Democracy, 1992. 92. Chomsky 93. Alexander Safian, “Is Israel Using ‘Excessive Force’ Against Palestinians?” Fact sheet: Myth of Excessive Force, Nov.9, 2000 94. Chomsky 95. Chomsky 96. CODEHUCA, p.106. 97. CODEHUCA, passim 98. Fellowship of Reconciliation (FOR), “Panama: A Test for U.S.-Latin American Foreign Relations,” Interhemispheric Resource Center Bulletin, May 1995 99. FOR 100. William Blum, Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II, 2000. 101. Alfred McCoy, The Politics of Heroin: CIA Complicity in the Global Drug Trade, 1991. Richard Sanders is the coordinator of the Coalition to Oppose the Arms Trade (COAT) and the editor of COAT’s quarterly magazine, Press for Conversion! For a free, sample copy, contact ad207@ncf.ca or visit their website: www.ncf.ca/

You still haven't told us the source for your claim, did some one tell you? Or was it 'a little bird' or did it come to you in a vision? COLBY ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Did a little bird tell you not to mention a certain country that uses flase flags mentioned in my links ???????????????? ======================================= Posted 18 February 2012 - 05:30 PM All of this ignores the arrests of Iranians in Thailand and predominantly Muslim Malaysia which seriously undermine the false flag theory. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Well,did I take a position ? Or just say related links ?? =============== Now Thai Iranians were seen at nightclubs....reminds me of Atta stories. Deep investigation may indicate a handler. Link 1 talked about a certain country and false flags which you ignored. sg This post has been edited by Steven Gaal: 18 February 2012 - 05:36 PM ================ I didnt know of handler till FEB 20. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ MEK HELPERS 2007 with six other Balochi menJavad Naroui, Masoud Nosratzehi, Houshang Shahnavazi, Yahya Sohrabzehi, Ali Reza Brahoui and Abdalbek ----------------JAVAD a Baluchi I said Javad Nikkhahfard (JAVAD) Boluchistan name. SO I DONT UNDERSTAND YOUR PROBLEM ?? _________ FOX NEWS Winai identified the suspect as 52-year-old Javad Nikkhahfard and said he was believed to be a bomb maker who had possibly been training ... ================== LINK VERY odd http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1202/S00191/signs-allegedly-posted-by-iranian-bombers-baffle-bangkok.htm

======================vvvvvvvv============================ Britain to heat up later ?? link

Its not 'greek' to USA poor,they know more,they live it. link ======================+========================== SPAIN link http://uk.news.yahoo.com/spain-barter-economy-wins-followers-grip-crisis-110524512.html

COLBY =Come on; get off it you obviously though MEK was a Baluchi group. So whats you theory now, that to make Iran look bad they were MEK operatives posing as Baluchis or Baluchis posing as MEK ones? How would either embarrass Iran? Or was that the cover story within the cover story? ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ You know I watch/study CIA,thus your above remark is oddball insult.MEK is a layer between intell agencies and operation. Baluchi are mostly anti Iran current government,thus can be recruited. This is a difficult concept ???? ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ "Deep investigation may indicate a handler" PREVIOUS STATEMENT Gaal this thread Steve SAID,there would be handler..........1st line COLBY="???? Your 1st line is not what you actually said" //conclusion: COLBY Dosent want anyone right but him. ================================================ conclusion: Cobly nitpicks when in corner. Gives 'NO' credit to his perceived enemies. I predicted handler and there was one,however, you implied by, ="???? Your 1st line is not what you actually said",that no prediction was made. Colby is incorrect. vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv Night shift worker Steve says ,"to sleep perchance to dream". +++++++++++++++++++++++++ To be or not to be Colby that !! is the question...... JAVAD (below) ====================== 2007 Zahedan BombingMain article: 2007 Zahedan bombings On February 14, 2007, a car bomb and gunfire directed at a bus killed 18 members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps. Guards commander Qasem Rezaei said, "This blind terrorist operation led to the martyrdom of 18 citizens of Zahedan" and attributed the attack to "insurgents and elements of insecurity."[90] Jundallah claimed responsibility for the attack on 15 February.[91] Iranian security forces also arrested five suspects, two of whom were carrying camcorders and grenades when they were arrested, while the police killed the main "agent" of the attack.[44] Among the arrestees was Said Qanbarzehi, a Balochi, who was hanged in Zahedan prison on 27 May 2007. He had been sentenced to death at the age of 17 along with six other Balochi men—Javad Naroui, Masoud Nosratzehi, Houshang Shahnavazi, Yahya Sohrabzehi, Ali Reza Brahoui and Abdalbek Kahrazehi (also known as Abdalmalek) -- in March 2007,[92] despite the absolute international prohibition on the execution of child offenders.[93] Two days later on Friday, Feb 16 2007, Jundallah bombed a girls school in city of Zahedan and the leader of the group took responsibility for it on the official TV of MEK.[94]

"Deep investigation may indicate a handler" PREVIOUS STATEMENT Gaal Steve SAID,there would be handler..........1st line COLBY="???? Your 1st line is not what you actually said" //conclusion: COLBY Dosent want anyone right but him. ------------------------------------------++++--------------------------------------------------------------- Javad Nikkhahfard (JAVAD) Boluchistan name. Colby "BS ...So it seems you just made up that claim."// conclusion: Colby poor internet researcher -----------------------------------------++++--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- COLBY" In any case MEK is a Shia group and Baluchs are Sunnis." ===== Yes !! Thats how you play the false flag 'game', deniability. The term "plausible deniability" can apply to any act that leaves little or no evidence of wrongdoing or abuse.// conclusion: Colby small imagination +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Steve SAID,there would be handler.......... COLBY=Lets not be disingenuous, at least own up to backing the false flag theory. Colby not ony tells me what to remember but also what I think.....(Control issues ??) =========================XXXXXXXXooooXXXXXXXX===================== (Bangkok Post 2/19/12) Bomb suspects 'were anti-Iran exiles Four Iranians suspected of involvement in a botched bomb plot targeting Israeli diplomats in Bangkok were members of an exiled Iranian opposition group which wanted the incident to reflect badly on Teheran, Syedsulaiman Husaini, Shia leader of Thailand, said on Sunday. He claimed the four belonged to the Mujahedin-e Khalq Organisation (also known as MEK, MKO and the People's Mujahedeen Organisation of Iran, or PMOI) which aims to overthrow the current Iranian government. The MEK has been on the US Department of States list of foreign terrorist organisations since 1977. Thai authorities and security agencies were not familiar with the group, said Mr Syedsulaima, who is also director of the Islamic studies centre at Al Mahdi Institute and former president of the Iran University Alumni Association. The Islamic scholar said the bomb incident was unlikely to be the work of the Iranian government as speculated because Bangkok and Teheran have good bilateral relations. A secret report by Irans security agency also indicated that the Iran nationals linked with Bangkoks latest bomb plot were members of the MEK, reports said. Formed in the 1960s, the organisation participated in Irans 1979 Islamic revolution that replaced the country's pro-Western ruler, Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, with a Shi'ite Islamist regime led by the Ayatollah Khomeini. The MEK, whose ideology mixes Marxism and Islam, was expelled from Iran two years later after trying to stage an armed uprising against Khomeini. ============================================================================================================== other suspects Winai identified the suspect as 52-year-old Javad Nikkhahfard and said he was believed to be a bomb maker who had possibly been training the three Iranians. He said Nikkhahfard was of Middle Eastern descent, but gave no other details and did not give his nationality. Nikkhahfard a Boluchistan type name http://pakobserver.net/detailnews.asp?id=135590 http://pak1stanfirst.com/201201173800/pakistan/defence/mossad-operating-in-balochistan.html

All of this ignores the arrests of Iranians in Thailand and predominantly Muslim Malaysia which seriously undermine the false flag theory. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Well,did I take a position ? Or just say related links ?? =============== Now Thai Iranians were seen at nightclubs....reminds me of Atta stories. Deep investigation may indicate a handler. Link 1 talked about a certain country and false flags which you ignored. sg

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++========++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Its not 'greek' to USA poor,they know more,they live it. link

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Alex Jones did some coverage.Jones had Ed Asner talk about NAVY SEALS doing false flag. Now lower down (below the fold in old Newspaper Talk) was false flag Iran story. -----------------oooo------------------------- link http://www.infowars.com/navy-seals-say-false-flag-to-be-blamed-on-iran-may-happen-at-anytime-ed-asner/ ========================o===================== related link http://www.opednews.com/articles/1/Multiple-Israel-False-Flag-by-Rob-Kall-120128-887.html ==============oooooooovoooooooo================ link http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/02/who-carried-out-the-terrorist-car-bombings-in-india-thailand-and-georgia.html

How do the Brits prepare their rat,different then USA ?? link http://poorrichards-blog.blogspot.com/2012/02/kids-eating-rats-for-dinner.html ===========--------========= link http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/feedarticle/10092898

WTF does this have to do with Jones? +++++++++++++ VVVV +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ VVVV ++++++++ The internet has a great deal of information/blogs on , "Alex Jones position regarding Israel,Pro or Con" These two incidents can be spun as false flag. link http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=257658 ++++++++++++++++==============+++++++++++++++++ ----------------------------------------------- Wife of diplomat already out of hospital. ---------vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv-------------------- link http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/israeli-wounded-in-attack-near-embassy-in-new-delhi-released-from-hospital-1.412723

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ LEE LETS SEE HOW HE SPINS THIS ============================================ Israeli embassy driver Roman Khachaturyan said he had just driven his child to school when he spotted the bomb. =================================================================================== 13 February 2012 Last updated at 13:41 ET Car bombs 'target Israel envoys' in India and Georgia ------------------------------------------------------ Bombers have targeted staff at Israeli embassies in India and Georgia, officials say, with Israel accusing Iran of masterminding the attacks. Witnesses said a motorcyclist placed a device on an embassy car in Delhi, causing a blast that hurt four people - one seriously. A bomb underneath a diplomat's car in Tbilisi was defused. Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu said Iran was behind both incidents. But Iranian officials denied the claims as "sheer lies". One of the victims of the Delhi bombing, the wife of a defence ministry official, was in a "critical but stable" condition, according to AFP news agency. It quoted a doctor as saying she had undergone spinal surgery. Mr Netanyahu told a meeting of his Likud party MPs that there had been "two attempts of terrorism against innocent civilians". "Iran is behind these attacks and it is the largest terror exporter in the world," he said. He also blamed Iran for recent plots to attack Israeli targets in Thailand and Azerbaijan that were prevented. And he suggested that the militant Islamist Hezbollah movement was also involved. Israel's foreign ministry said the country had the ability to track down those who carried out the attacks. But Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast rejected Mr Netanyahu's accusation, calling it "psychological warfare against Iran". "We condemn any terrorist action and the world knows that Iran is the biggest victim of terrorism," he was quoted as saying by the official Irna news agency. International condemnation Earlier, the state's ambassador to India Mehdi Nabizadeh had told Irna: "These accusations are untrue and sheer lies, like previous times." In a statement, India's Foreign Minister SM Krishna pledged a full investigation, adding: "The culprits will be brought to justice at the earliest." vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv00000000vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv The attack took place in a high security zone in the Indian capital, a kilometre from the heavily fortified Israeli embassy, and just down the road from the Indian prime minister's official residence. Eyewitnesses say a man on a motorcycle drove up to the Israeli embassy minivan, sporting distinct blue diplomatic plates, and appeared to attach something to the back. Minutes later it exploded. The vehicle itself has been badly damaged - the back of it blown out. Police and emergency services cordoned off the site almost immediately. Forensic experts in white jackets and members of the bomb disposal squad examined the debris - trying to find traces of the explosive. They were joined by Israeli embassy staff. Tonight Delhi has been placed on high alert with extra security outside Western embassies including that of the United States. India has not experienced this kind of an attack before and it's going to be a while before they make sense of what happened here. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton condemned the attacks, saying the US "stands ready to assist with any investigations of these cowardly actions". UK Foreign Secretary William Hague said he was "shocked and appalled" by the bombings. The BBC's Rupert Wingfield-Hayes, in Jerusalem, says security at Israeli embassies has been tightened in recent months following warnings of potential attacks, after Iran accused Israel of a series of attacks on its nuclear scientists. BBC security correspondent Gordon Corera said one of them, Mostafa Ahmadi-Roshan, died last month when motorcyclists placed a "sticky bomb" on his car - a technique similar to that used in previous attacks attributed to the work of Israel's Mossad. Similarities seen in the Delhi blast could be an indication of the aggressors sending a message that attacks in Tehran will be repaid in kind, he added. After the explosion in Delhi, Indian TV showed pictures of a burning car near the embassy. The area around the vehicle was later cordoned off and forensic experts and the bomb squad were examining the burnt out remains. The embassy is guarded by several layers of security and is in a well-defended area of central Delhi, close to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's official residence. 'Noticed device' David Goldfarb, the spokesman for Israel's Delhi embassy, said the diplomat's car was close to the building on Aurangzeb Road when the explosion went off. He said they had no details as to who was behind the attack. Officials in Georgia said an explosive device was attached to the bottom of a diplomat's car in the capital, Tbilisi, but was found and defused before it detonated. Israeli embassy driver Roman Khachaturyan said he had just driven his child to school when he spotted the bomb. "When I was driving I heard a noise. I got out of the car and saw something stuck to it

++++++++++++++++++ Jim I dont want to get things off track between you and Mr. Caddy,but for you I have something to consider. ------------------------------------------------ Senator Bennett's strong faith in Mormonism and Richard Nixon was shared by his son Robert. On page 7 of his book Why I Am A Mormon, Senator Bennett indicated that Robert Bennett and his other sons have served on missions for the Mormon Church. According to James A. Everett, Robert Bennett served his "mission in England" (Letter dated Oct. 15, 1974). Mr. Everett also stated that "Mr. Bennett has maintained a most respected position in the Mormon Church and I believe has been a Stake President. I know he was active as Counselor to the Stake President and has served in setting up the P.R. activity in the Eastern States." (Letter dated Oct. 15, 1974) http://www.utlm.org/newsletters/no37.htm ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Funny Helms has to write letter to CIA cover company...........maybe.......CIA/MI6 joint operation. Would a young Morman missionary today be able to discern if he was working for MI6/CIA/FBI/DOD ?? "You'll be helping the CIA.......","You love your country,dont you ?" To me,its possible of MI6 penetration into Mullen Company.Mr.Bennett may have been compromised in his "mission in England". Later we discovered that Robert Bennett was the actual owner of the Mullen Co. and that this company handled international public relations for the Mormon Church. Jim in my big interview by William Weston, I mention how MacNaughtom attempted to recruit my Uncle to work for him. BUT MY UNCLE HAD ALREADY DONE CIA WORK IN OIL ANALYSIS. See to me JIM, MacNaughton was MI6. JIm LORD Cordray was ultra elite and had possilble connections to British Intell. DeGloyer worked for Cordray. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ OSS has such deep British connections. DeGloyer would have also known British intell people as director of conservation with the Office of the Coordinator for National Defense from 1941 to 1942. In the same year, DeGolyer organized the formation of the Rycade Oil Company as well as the Amerada Petroleum Corporation for Lord Cowdray, rising to become general manager, president, and chairman from 1929 to 1932 DeGolyer left the firm in 1932, but remained with Rycade, which was established to explore salt dome oil deposits through 1941.[2] As a geophysical consultant with Rycade, DeGolyer made the first torsion balance survey in the United States at the Spindletop oilfield. An oilfield found by DeGolyer on behalf of Rycade at Nash, Texas was the first oilfield anywhere to be discovered using geophysics.[4] From 1925 DeGolyer established the Geophysical Research Corporation as a subsidiary of Amerada to develop reflective seismology techniques originated by J. Clarence Karcher and Eugene McDermott, leaving in 1932 to move to Dallas, Texas. DeGolyer provided financial support for the 1930 establishment of GRC's successor, Geophysical Service Incorporated. GSI went on to spin off Texas Instruments.[6] In 1936 with Lewis MacNaughton, DeGolyer established the petroleum exploration consulting firm DeGolyer and MacNaughton, and Core Laboratories, Incorporated the same year to provide drilling core and fluids analysis. DeGolyer was also associated with the Atlatl Royalty Company from 1932 to 1950 and the Felmont Corporation in 1934. In 1956 he established Isotopes, Incorporated to provide radioactive isotopes for oilfield and industrial purposes.[2] During World War II, DeGolyer served as director of conservation with the Office of the Coordinator for National Defense from 1941 to 1942. He was assistant deputy of the Petroleum Administration for War in 1942-43, and was in charge of the Petroleum Reserves Corporation mission to the Middle East in 1943-44 He was president of the American Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers in 1927, and was a director of the American Petroleum Institute for twenty years.[4] In 1946, working on behalf of the Office of Strategic Services, the forerunner to the Central Intelligence Agency, DeGolyer recruited Jack Crichton of Dallas, to operate a group of companies which frequently were given new names, presumably to make it more difficult to trace their operations. According to investigative journalist Russ Baker (not to be confused with Russell Baker of The New York Times), the companies "operated largely below the radar, and fronted for some of North America's biggest names, including the Bronfmans (Seagram's liquor), the Du Ponts, and the Kuhn-Loeb family of financiers."[7] Crichton became a prominent oil and gas industrialist and was the 1964 Republican gubernatorial nominee. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ The connection to Lord Cordray are deep. Cordray was main Mexican Eagle investor. In 1909, C. Willard Hayes, chief geologist of the Mexican Eagle Oil Company (El Águila) in Tampico, hired DeGolyer to head the exploration staff. All the way back to 1909 and the again in 1929 DeGloyer worked for Lord Cordray. ================================================================================================================= pg 90 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:e8PE_ZEaYG0J:www.ohioana.org/quarterly/earlyq/winter1967/taney1.pdf+Mexican+Eagle+Lord+Cordray&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESg7BM9d0vPh1TVxi341qrw0HN5cDM_W1mQGl8jHkUzNhtHE5hubNy35DFHwvgnxc3bHNMD4-VuizjkJdQAqz2YYBFa1xG1fnpBbNamxs2bslpx9VQf6QPgDrMVI9H7WX9F15bxx&sig=AHIEtbTGG8FTPSxbIeSUW0gdJrfNmqs95w

=============================+========================================== ======================================================================== Robo-Signing Bank Settlement is a Criminal Sell Out Feb 9 2012 - 7:06am (Better Markets Blog) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Let me help a few victims I created by ripping them off and illegally throwing them out of their homes by false court filings that I swore were true." That's what the so-called mortgage settlement talks are really all about: fraud, perjury and crimes. That's what these banks did and that's what they are trying to buy their way out of. The settlement discussions are the same: eliminate all or almost all liability for the bank and, most importantly, all bank officers and employees in exchange for a loan forgiveness or modification program. Think about this: the banks engaged in a years-long pattern and practice of what can only be described as fraudulent if not criminal conduct that would put anyone else in prison for years if not decades, yet banks get to buy off the cops with some money to help the victims they created. Worst of all, there is no requirement in any of these talks that I'm aware of that require the banks to come clean, publicly release all the relevant documents and provide sufficient information on their conduct so that anyone can evaluate whether the sell-out, I mean, pay-off, oops, I mean, "settlement" is anywhere near adequate. And they get to buy their way out of prosecution for chump-change. It’s reported that the settlement is going be $25 billion, with only $5 billion in cash and $20 billion in “loan forgiveness.” That’s nothing. There are more than 10 million homes under water where the amount they owe on their mortgages is more than the house is valued, i.e., could be sold for. $20 billion doesn’t make a dent in that: 1 million homes at $20,000 loan forgiveness is it. And, remember, $20 billion in "loan forgiveness" to the banks is not equal to $20 billion in cash. It is more like $10 billion, if that, due to accounting, prior write-downs and other shenagigans. There is also the risk of a tacit conspiracy here. The banks want to "put this behind them" (gee, who wouldn't) and escape from real liability (criminal and civil) and the prosecutors (many of them politicians) and the administration want to claim victory. You will hear that the settlement was the largest, one of the largest or the greatest settlement in history that will help millions or billions or trillions of people who need help - you get the point: no hyperbole will be spared. As if all that wasn't bad enough, the most egregious aspect of all this may be the reporting: stories repeatedly use innocuous words that obscure what really happened here. For example, so-called "robo signing" is massive, systematic, fraudulent, criminal conduct. This is where banks themselves or their contractors sign legal documents to file in court swearing under oath that the facts are true and therefore support the legal application to take someone's home away from them, i.e., foreclose. Can you think of anything more despicable? Lying under oath to get someone thrown out of their home and onto the street. That's what robo-signing means and what it obscures every time that word is used. Then, there's always someone saying, basically, no harm, no foul because it's just a "paper work" problem and these people are all delinquent and "deserve" to be thrown out on the street. Really? Since when does saying "trust us" while we lie to you under oath make illegal conduct acceptable? And, the fraudulent if not criminal conduct occurred throughout the boom as well as the bust (when the robo-signing and other criminal conduct occurred). For example, there are unending examples of mortgage brokers changing income, job history and other material terms in mortgage applications without the person having any knowledge of it. Another example is putting large amounts of unqualified mortgages into packages that were securitized in violation of the required representations and warranties. Anywhere else this would be called lying, cheating and stealing and it’s past time it gets called by the right name. And, everyone should insist on no settlements by anyone that includes the elimination of liability for a corporation or any of its officers or employees unless it also includes a requirement that all documents related to the conduct are all publicly disclosed on a central, searchable website. That won't happen because they the conduct of the prosecutors and politicians in the sellout, er, settlement could be evaluated along with the conduct of the banks - see the problem here? If they are getting any legal immunity, which is what they are demanding, then the American people deserve to at least know what laws they violated and how they did it so everyone knows what they are getting immunity for. That simply must be a price for forgiving what has been years of unconscionable fraudulent and almost certainly criminal conduct that has victimized tens of millions of American families, hollowed out neighborhood after neighborhood, and stuck millions more homeowners with underwater mortgages through no fault of their own. ==================================+============================================= ==================================v============================================= Exclusive: Obama to pitch lower corporate tax By Kim Dixon | Reuters – Fri, 10 Feb, 2012 WASHINGTON (Reuters) President Barack Obama will call for cutting the top 35 percent corporate tax rate as early as this month, according to two sources close to the administration. The president is likely to propose a rate closer to an average of that seen in peer nations, the sources said. This would jibe with remarks made last year by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who suggested the United States should be moving to a rate more in line with its major trading partners in the high 20-percent range. Obama outlined tax measures - including closing tax loopholes for companies that move facilities and jobs overseas - in his State of the Union speech in January, and will lay out principles for revamping corporate taxes by the end of February, a senior administration official said. ... link http://ca.news.yahoo.com/exclusive-obama-pitch-lower-corporate-tax-sources-222544743.html

LET THEM EAT GAS. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Food bank use rises dramatically in Britain By Dennis Moore 9 February 2012 Tens of thousands of Britons are struggling to make ends meet, forcing ever greater numbers to resort to the use of food banks. There are now 163 food banks in the UK. In 2011 alone there was one opening every week. Food banks were first launched in 2000 by the Trussell Trust to address the problem of providing emergency provisions of food to people who had no money. People are referred from Citizens Advice, GPs (doctors), social workers and school liaison officers. Each person is entitled to three vouchers at a time, with each voucher exchanged for an emergency bag of food that lasts approximately three days. Food banks have seen a rise in some cases of between 15 percent and 30 percent in traffic since the beginning of the recession. The level of generalised poverty in the UK has grown to 13 million people living below the poverty line. Chris Mould, executive chairman of the Trussell Trust, has estimated that 1,000 food banks are needed across the country. The charity is planning to expand its operation to 445 food banks by 2015 to be able to feed 450,000 people a year, but this will rely on receiving £1.6 million in funding. There has been a marked increase in the number of young people needing help since January, 2011 when the government scrapped the Educational Maintenance Allowance (EMA) paid to working class youth to seek higher. The manager of the Salisbury Food Bank, Mark Ward, says, We have kids at college coming in. They might live at home, but the parents have issues, or they may be sofa surfingliving at friends houses. In September 2011, the Trussell Trust said that the numbers of young people using its food banks had risen from 41,000 to 65,500 in the previous 12 months. Many young people are not entitled to welfare benefits. Now the government is launching a major attack on existing welfare arrangements that will force many people already on the bread line over the edge. It is estimated that up to one third of the UK population have little or no savings, or any available funds to fall back on. Mould said, We have people who are going without food in order to feed their children, sometimes for days, for all sorts of different reasons, but fundamentally because their incomes are too low to support their basic needs of housing, clothing and food. The growth in the use of food banks is not restricted to those on benefits, or the lowest incomes. Ten percent of those using food banks would be considered middle income people, who have had to suffer pay freezes or have lost their jobs. In 2011 FareShare, an organisation founded in 2004 that redirects food trade surpluses to those in need from 17 sites in the UK, saw an increase in the number of people it feeds from 29,000 to 35,500. The number of organisations who have signed up to receive food from FareShare rose from 600 to 700. Some 42 percent of those organisations recorded increases of up to 50 percent in demand for their services, the largest annual increase in the number of charities asking for help. For those dependent on benefits, it has become a hand-to-mouth existence. One woman who was eight months pregnant had to resort to burning shelves to be able to keep warm. In 2011, three factories closed down in the small town of Okehampton in Devon, leaving 350 workers redundant. A local food bank run from a Baptist church, which had previously sent food parcels to impoverished East European countries, had to redirect some of its aid to Okehampton, due to the unprecedented demand. As many as 200 people a week sought food assistance following the closures. Many of the workers had not been paid for weeks, and then had to wait up to five more weeks before they started to receive any state benefits. This exemplifies how the sharp rise in food and fuel prices is leaving many people with a stark choice: either pay the rent, try to keep warm or eat. Martin Caraher, professor of food policy at City University London, told the Guardian that recent research confirms the massive increase in the use of food banks recorded by the Trussell Trust and FareShare. He said, There are around 13 million people in Britain living in poverty, which is defined as earnings of 60 percent of the national average. Of those, four million are suffering nutritionally-related consequences. And the big new group are working families. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ =======================oooo=========================== God save the queen The fascist regime They made you a moron Potential H-bomb God save the queen She ain't no human being There is no future In England's dreaming Don't be told what you want Don't be told what you need There's no future, no future, No future for you God save the queen We mean it man We love our queen God saves God save the queen 'Cause tourists are money And our figurehead Is not what she seems Oh God save history God save your mad parade Oh Lord God have mercy All crimes are paid When there's no future How can there be sin We're the flowers in the dustbin We're the poison in your human machine We're the future, your future God save the queen We mean it man We love our queen God saves God save the queen We mean it man And there is no future In England's dreaming No future, no future, No future for you No future, no future, No future for me No future, no future, No future for you No future, no future

Government 'may sanction nerve-agent use on rioters', scientists fear (Steve Connor ,The Independent) Leading neuroscientists believe that the UK Government may be about to sanction the development of nerve agents for British police that would be banned in warfare under an international treaty on chemical weapons. A high-level group of experts has asked the Government to clarify its position on whether it intends to develop "incapacitating chemical agents" for a range of domestic uses that go beyond the limited use of chemical irritants such as CS gas for riot control. The experts were commissioned by the Royal Society, the UK's national academy of sciences, to investigate new developments in neuroscience that could be of use to the military. They concluded that the Government may be preparing to exploit a loophole in the Chemical Weapons Convention allowing the use of incapacitating chemical agents for domestic law enforcement. The 1993 convention bans the development, stockpiling and use of nerve agents and other toxic chemicals by the military but there is an exemption for certain chemical agents that could be used for "peaceful" domestic purposes such as policing and riot control. The British Government has traditionally taken the view that only a relatively mild class of irritant chemical agents that affect the eyes and respiratory tissues, such as CS gas, are exempt from the treaty, and then only strictly for use in riot control. But the Royal Society working group says the Government shifted its position to allow the development of more severe chemical agents, such as the type of potentially dangerous nerve gases used by Russian security forces to end hostage sieges. "The development of incapacitating chemical agents, ostensibly for law-enforcement purposes, raises a number of concerns in the context of humanitarian and human-rights law, as well as the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC)," the report says. "The UK Government should publish a statement on the reasons for its apparent recent shift in position on the interpretation of the CWC's law enforcement position." The Royal Society group points to a 1992 statement by Douglas Hogg, the then Foreign Office Minister, who indicated that riot-control agents were the only toxic chemicals that the UK considered to be permitted for law-enforcement purposes. But in 2009 ministers gave a less-restrictive definition suggesting the use of "incapacitating" chemical agents would be permitted for law-enforcement purposes as long as they were in the categories and quantities consistent with that permitted purpose. Professor Rod Flower, a biochemical pharmacologist at Queen Mary University of London, said the latest scientific insights into human brain is leading to novel ways of degrading human performance using chemicals.

So will you tell us what they say even if they contradict you? END COLBY QUOTE ================================================================================= insult,attack or both ??

see http://debka.com/article/21691/ ----------- ---- my 'if' 'then' speculation = AUGUST 17 is new moon, a time of possible attack. Then if Iranian air force,radars gone, non infra red and non look down radar satellites can use the fuller moon of August 26th to Sept 6th for mop up. -------------------------o-----------------o-------------------------- August 2012 will feature not 1 but 2 full moons. The full moon occurs once every 29.5 days. This essentially means that there is one full moon every month. However, as we know, every month but February has at least 30 days in it, which presents the potential for two full moons in a month. August 2012 - is one of these unique months, which will have two full moons. There will be a full moon on August 2nd, and then another full moon on August 31st. So those of us whom are superstitious in regards to full moons will have two special days in August of 2012. The term Blue Moon can refer to the second full moon in a given month. When people say "once in a blue moon" they are speaking to the rarity of the occurrence of a second moon happening in the same given month.

You wrote, "I think Steve was very restrained in highlighting a way that you insult, Len" - but now you deny "claim[ing] that I have a penchant for insulting members of this forum". I'm confused and suspect you are as well. PS - STEVE Have you turned up ANY evidence in support of your claim yet? ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Working on youth Church outreach. Yet I have EMAILed people that are Noguchi connected. Waiting response. sg

link http://www.rense.com/general95/khal.html Khalilzad - A Satan Whispering In The Hearts Of Men Dr Mohammed Daud Miraki, MA, MA, PhD Dr Rahmat Rabi Zirakyar, MA, PhD 2-2-12 (posted in fair use) ############################ooooVVVVVVVVoooo################################## ======================================================================== “Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster.” -- German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche: 1844-1900 Few days ago, Zalmay Khalilzad invited some tribal elder in Kabul to secure their allegiance in the event that he nominates himself as a candidate in the next Presidential election in 2014. Upon hearing this news, we were both angry and surprised. We were angry for Khalilzad’s disregard for the Afghan lives and the role Khalilzad played in facilitating the conditions wherein they find themselves. Khalilzad was in part the architect of the current misery. We were surprised to see how shameless this man has become and continues to show no remorse to be the point man for Washington’s global architects of disaster in the region. Hence, we felt compelled to write this short write-up in order to shed some light on who he is and what he has done for Afghanistan since his conduct cease to reflect Afghan dignity or Islamic values. Khalilzad made a career from advocating wars and destruction in the region. He has been one of the neoconservatives and a protégé of Paul Wolfowitz and had studied under Albert Wohlstetter, philosophical thinker for the neoconservative movement in the United States. It is through these types of mentorships that Khalilzad was able to advance to the sphere of influence in the US foreign policy circles. He earned his PhD from the University of Chicago in 1979 and served as fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and has worked on the Project for the New American Century, the neoconservative philosophy that molded the post-911 world. In 1998, he and the other neoconservatives signed a letter to then President Clinton advocating the removal of Saddam Hussein. The inspiration for this letter stemmed from the Policy Paper, Clean Break, which advocated toppling regimes through wars throughout the Middle East. During the Bush Administration Khalilzad and his neoconservative associates advocated war in Iraq, a fact well established by their letter to President Clinton in 1998. In Iraq, of course, it is no secret that over a million people lost their lives, millions were maimed and the dignity of its people compromised and historical artifacts looted. In short he was the point man for Dick Cheney when George W Bush was elected President and worked in the National Security Council [NSC] under Condoleezza Rice. It is there in the NSC, where he has most likely helped plan the invasion of Afghanistan. It is worth mentioning that his plans for the invasion of Afghanistan stemmed from his so-called White Paper he had led to author in 1998. The White Paper was actually the “Dark Paper” for what was to become of Afghanistan. His prescription for the cure of war-torn Afghanistan in reality caused the current sociopolitical epidemic. Khalilzad’s White Paper invested a lot in the Afghan minorities, warlord, drug lords, and the future shape of the Afghan government. As envisaged in his White Paper, Khalilzad had planned for a weak central government in Afghanistan with the goal to please Afghanistan’s neighbors. That is why, the development of different parts of Afghanistan were entrusted to the immediate neighbors of Afghanistan and India. Similarly, through his suggestions, individuals with direct links to foreign countries found their way to the new government in Kabul further creating dependency on the countries in region. The rationale for Khalilzad’s approach was that Afghanistan had created rivalries between neighbors of Afghanistan; hence, something had to be done to alleviate those rivalries. However, common sense dictates that any such approach would further foster factions inside Afghanistan with allegiance to outside powers. Furthermore, Khalilzad advocated local autonomy in the new system of government. This set the stage for warlords to seek the system of federalism to secure their gains and work for the division of Afghanistan. Since Khalizad facilitated outside influence in Afghanistan, the goal of the criminal warlords of the Northern Alliance was on track to seek federalism, a precursor to the division of Afghanistan. This method of appeasing the warlords could have stemmed from one conceived goal, corruption. Khalilzad probably aimed to gain influence in these corrupt circles for corruption purposes; otherwise, why would any rational person pursue such an approach that would add to the internal instability of Afghanistan. It is no secret that billions have vanished in Afghanistan and those billions could not have disappeared without outside cooperation from officials of the US government. To sum up Khalilzad, he was trained for imperial violence and domination. He has his hand in every US adventure aimed at killing Muslims in region under the pretext of the war on terror. He has signed known documents such as the neoconservatives letter to President Clinton in 1998 advocating the removal of Saddam Hussein, hence, war in Iraq. Furthermore, he has been the architect of the disastrous regime of Karzai and his criminal affiliates, the Northern Alliance Warlords. His political plans certainly qualify as evil politics; hence, in this mode of politics, it would not be far fetched to say that he acts like Satan, who “whispers in the hearts of men.” On a personal note, Khalizad has two sons, Alexander Benard and Maximilian Benard. Their names do not appear to have any cultural or religious links to Afghanistan. Our question is based on what background or positive contribution in Afghanistan, has he decided to run for president in 2014? Dr Mohammed Daud Miraki, MA, MA, PhD mdmiraki@ameritech.net Dr Rahmat Rabi Zirakyar, MA, PhD zirakyar1234@yahoo.com