Steven Gaal

if farmers were feeding it to their livestock they presumably would notice the animals were becoming emaciated rather than put on weight // COLBY ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ cows dying from gmo corn I put that in GOOGLE .....got some returns !! (DID YOU THINK OF DOING THAT ??)

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Yes no room for doubt. Mr. Colby is very selective in his news readings . NO DOUBT. Exampled was his lack of knowledge of the overhyping of vaccine need in the European Flu Epidemic two years back by the (corrupt) WHO. IT WAS A BIG STORY, AND NOW MAN WHO BLOVIATES ehh... PONTIFICATES ehh..ehh ........ SHARES HIS EXPERT OPINIONS WITH US ON THE MIDDLE EAST DOESNT NOW ABOUT THIS ISSUE/EVENT. CAN WE TRUST HIM ON OTHER ANALYSIS ???? ***************************************************************

British banks engulfed in new scandals By Jordan Shilton http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/04/16/hbos-a16.html 16 April 2013 A parliamentary report released April 5 on the collapse of HBOS (Halifax Bank of Scotland) points to acts of criminality and corruption that go well beyond one financial institution. Commissioned to provide an account of the bank’s demise in 2008, which resulted in a £20 billion taxpayer bailout and the bank being taken over by Lloyds, the report documents the responsibility of the bank’s leadership as well as the financial regulators for the collapse. The Parliamentary Commission on Banking declared that HBOS crashed after a lack of risk controls, rapid and aggressive expansion and poor management, which amounted to a “colossal failure” on the part of bank executives. Particular criticism was directed at HBOS’s former head Sir James Crosby, who led the bank until 2006. The inquiry described him as the “architect of the strategy that set the course for disaster.” His successor, Andy Hornby, and bank chairman Lord Stevenson were criticised for having been “unwilling or unable to change course” and, in the case of Stevenson, for having been “incapable of facing the realities of what placed the bank in jeopardy from that time until now.” The report touches on only some of the corrupt practices which took place in the financial sector. It notes the complicity of the regulators, including the Financial Services Authority (FSA), in failing to warn of the risks confronting HBOS due to its speculative operations. Although the FSA raised concerns as early as 2002 about the bank’s business model, nothing was done to alter HBOS’s activity. The report remarks, “From 2004 to the latter part of 2007, the FSA was not so much the dog that did not bark as a dog barking up the wrong tree.” This can be said not just for its treatment of HBOS. Britain’s famous “light-touch” regulation, introduced by Labour under Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, facilitated a dramatic expansion of financial speculation in the years prior to 2008. The report does not mention some of the largest swindles of this period, including the fixing of the Libor inter-bank rate, which involved the major banks and, as evidence last year suggested, even reached the Bank of England. On Friday, another executive at RBS (Royal Bank of Scotland) was forced to resign his post as head of the bank’s Japanese division, after being confronted with allegations that he helped organise the fixing of the Yen Libor. Nor does the report mention the involvement of the major financial institutions in the laundering of drug money, which acted as a source of liquidity for the banks during the crisis. The revolving door which exists between the banks, regulators and government has emerged clearly in the wake of the report. Crosby was appointed to the board of the FSA in 2003 by the Labour government, and was awarded his knighthood in 2006. Even in 2008, when it was clear that a crisis was developing, then Chancellor Alistair Darling appointed Crosby to organise a working group on mortgages. Between 2006 and 2008, following his retirement from HBOS, Crosby was deputy chair of the FSA. Unsurprisingly, when in 2004 allegations of high risk-taking were presented to the FSA by whistleblower Paul Moore, a manager at HBOS, they were ignored. This decision would have undoubtedly involved Crosby as a board member, who afterwards proceeded to fire Moore from his position as head of group regulatory risk at HBOS. John Griffith-Jones, the new head of the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), one of the two successor organisations to the FSA, has come under mounting pressure to resign his post. Griffith-Jones was the head of accountants KPMG when they audited HBOS in the years prior to 2008 and gave it a clean bill of health. Crosby has agreed to give up his knighthood and forego 30 percent of his annual pension of £580,000. Pressure is building on Hornby and Stevenson to give up a portion of their large HBOS pension packages. Hornby, the chief executive at the time of the bank’s collapse, also received £251,000 in a so-called change of ownership arrangement when the bank was bailed out by the taxpayer. Presented by the media and Labour Party as an example of how bankers are being made to pay for their role in the financial crisis, the response to the commission’s report is a desperate attempt by the ruling class as a whole to conceal its involvement in vast levels of criminality and financial mismanagement. After it emerged last week that seven HBOS executives received bonuses of over £1 million in the same year the bank failed, several parliamentarians called for an inquiry. But such an investigation, should it ever takes place, would be another cover-up to divert attention away from the culpability of the political elite as well as the banks for the crisis. Labour MP John Mann, a member of parliament’s banking select committee, hailed Crosby’s actions as a magnanimous gesture which others should follow, even though he will continue to have a pension worth more than £400,000 and have no further action taken against him. A spokesman for Prime Minister David Cameron declared that it was “a matter for their (the bankers’) consciences” whether they followed Crosby’s example. Far from it being a matter “for their consciences”, the criminal actions of the financial elite are of deep concern to society and broad masses of working people. The fact that not one banking official has been prosecuted for practices that have brought the entire economy to the brink of collapse is an indictment of the corruption and criminality which pervades economic and political life in Britain and internationally. Instead of facing criminal investigations, the banks are again handing their executives massive bonuses. On March 20, Barclays announced it was awarding head of investment Rich Ricci £17.5 million of shares, which he immediately cashed in. The bank’s chief executive Antony Jenkins received £5.3 million in shares. This takes place as indications grow that a new crisis is just around the corner. At the end of March, a report by the Bank of England’s Financial Policy Committee (FPC) revealed a capital shortfall in Britain’s main banks of £25 billion which it warned needed to be filled by the end of 2013. An article in the Daily Telegraph cited anonymous officials at the bank, who “privately point out that dealing with the failure of a major clearing bank today remains as dangerous and difficult as it was back in 2008, when Royal Bank of Scotland and HBOS’s near-death experience brought the financial system as close to collapse as at any time in living memory.” The minutes of the latest FPC meeting were published on April 5, the same day as the HBOS report. They noted that concerns existed among some committee members that the figure of £25 billion would be insufficient, and they “were inclined to put in place additional upfront insurance.” As the wider economy continues to stagnate, and with deepening instability internationally, these concerns suggest that Britain’s financial institutions could be even more directly exposed to a financial crisis when it breaks out than they were in 2008.

Senator Roger Wicker tied into Boston Bombing http://www.fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/senator-roger-wicker-tied-into-boston-bombing/41289/ By: From the Trenches As previously mentioned, the emphases is being directed toward connecting the bombing with US national patriots, and another little bit of sleaze has now been injected. News is just breaking that contends that an envelope sent to Senator Roger Wicker (R-MS) contained ricin, a deadly poison. Now one might ask how the Senator, the ricin, and the bombing are connected. Senator Roger Wicker is one of the sixteen GOP Senators who voted to stop the filibuster which would have shut down the 2nd Article infringement debate which is going on this week in the US Senate. Wicker has been named as a traitor to the Republic by the patriot community, as he and the other fifteen Senators voted for the debate in spite of the fact that they had previously identified the gun legislation as an infringement upon our Bill of Rights, making the act one with knowledge and forethought.

3 ideas,Gaal plant the false leads evidence ahead of time Special Reports Israel raid stirs threat of Syrian revenge Syria has threatened to retaliate against Israel for Wednesday's airstrike, which Damascus says destroyed a chemical weapons research center Published: Feb. 1, 2013 at 3:16 PM TEL AVIV, Israel, Feb. 1 (UPI) -- Syria has threatened to retaliate against Israel for an airstrike that Damascus says destroyed a chemical weapons research center. However, since President Bashar Assad's regime is fighting for survival, it's unlikely a new Middle East war's about to erupt. Even so, as Israeli commentator Boaz Bismuth observed in the Yisrael Hayom daily Friday, after nearly two years of civil war Assad "does not have much to lose. A wounded lion is a dangerous lion." Assad's forces are fighting an increasingly effective rebel force and taking on such a powerful foe as Israel would be suicidal. But it's a rough neighborhood and never wise to discount any threat, however unlikely, as the Israelis know only too well. Meantime, the actual target of the airstrike Wednesday near Syria's border with Lebanon remains unclear. U.S. and Arab sources say it was a truck convoy taking Russian-built SA-17 anti-aircraft missiles or other advanced weapons to Hezbollah, a key ally of Syria and Iran, into nearby Lebanon. Syrian authorities say the Israelis blasted a "scientific research center" near Damascus. Details are sketchy but Western and Arab security sources identified it as the Scientific Studies and Research Center, known by the French acronym CERS, at Jarmaya, 15 miles northwest of Damascus. The sources said the complex is known to have conducted research in chemical and biological weapons. Syrian transfers of conventional weapons to Hezbollah have either been carried out there, or at a nearby location, for transportation to Hezbollah's heartland in Lebanon's Bekaa Valley. It's still not possible to determine which claim is true. The Jerusalem Post reported that CERS has tagged a major security threat and potential Israeli target for several years. In 2004, Israel's Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center warned that CERS was developing deadly ricin-based weapons. The following year, U.S. President George Bush designated the Syrian center a weapons proliferator. In 2010, Israelis reserve Brig. Gen. Nitzan Nuriel, a former director of the National Security Council's Counter-terrorism Bureau, warned that CERS would be demolished if it continued to arm terrorist organizations. It could take some before the truth of what happened Wednesday emerges. When Israeli F-15s destroyed a North Korean-built nuclear reactor in Syria Sept. 6, 2007, it took months before a clear picture emerged of what had taken place. Israel, which rarely publicly acknowledges such operations, still doesn't discuss the 2007 airstrike. In that night-time raid, an electronic warfare aircraft blinded Syrian air defenses so that the F-16s, looping out over the Mediterranean, weren't detected until they bombed the unfinished reactor near the Iraqi border. The Israelis view weapons like the SA-17, which operate as road-mobile batteries, or new Russian anti-tanks missiles, as highly dangerous, because in Hezbollah's hands they pose a critical challenge to the Jewish state's air and armor supremacy. "These are no less troubling than chemical weapons," said Giora Eiland, a former Israeli national security adviser. "They're more widespread and not as tightly controlled by the regime, so they can fall into the hands of Hezbollah." Hezbollah's providing hundreds of seasoned fighters to help the Syrian regime fight the rebels. But the movement faces an uncertain future if Assad, its key ally and patron, is toppled, not only in its conflict with Israel but also in Lebanon itself where its power comes from its guns. The Shiite organization would be targeted by Sunni rivals in Syria who would dominate any successor regime in Damascus and it would also be cut off from its supply route from Iran. So, the Israelis surmise, Hezbollah may well be accelerating its acquisition of advanced weapons from Syria while it can. These could be used against Israel if Iran, Hezbollah's creator and ideological mentor, is attacked. If that is the case, the target Wednesday wasn't the Syrians, but Hezbollah. So there could be further airstrikes. The worse Assad's position grows, the more attempts Hezbollah will make to grab whatever weapons it can get its hands on," observed Israeli analyst Amos Harel in the Haaretz daily. And here there be dragons. Ali Akbar Velayati, a former Iranian foreign minister and now a key adviser to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, warned Saturday that "an attack on Syria is considered an attack on Iran and Iran's allies." Read more: http://www.upi.com/T.../#ixzz2QfWXm6Cn ###################### ###################### or SAUDI AL QAEDA = AQAP http://www.thedailyb...-bin-laden.html Zawahiri has also been gaining somewhat belated endorsements as the new amir of al Qaeda from its various franchises around the Muslim world. The Shabab al Mujahedin movement in Somalia was among the first to endorse him. Franchises in Iraq and North Africa have also supported his selection by al Qaeda’s governing shura council. Now al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, the powerful group in Yemen, has given him a full endorsement. Its leader, Abu Baseer al Wuhayshi, and its ideologue, Anwar al-Awlaki, have both come out with praise for the Egyptian. This comes as reports have surfaced that AQAP is experimenting with the deadly toxin ricin for future terror attacks and after the group apparently tried to assassinate Saudi Arabian Interior Minister Prince Nayef in Jedda this summer in his armor-plated limousine. ########## ########## or Senator Roger Wicker tied into Boston Bombing http://www.fromthetr...-bombing/41289/ By: From the Trenches As previously mentioned, the emphases is being directed toward connecting the bombing with US national patriots, and another little bit of sleaze has now been injected. News is just breaking that contends that an envelope sent to Senator Roger Wicker (R-MS) contained ricin, a deadly poison. Now one might ask how the Senator, the ricin, and the bombing are connected. Senator Roger Wicker is one of the sixteen GOP Senators who voted to stop the filibuster which would have shut down the 2nd Article infringement debate which is going on this week in the US Senate. Wicker has been named as a traitor to the Republic by the patriot community, as he and the other fifteen Senators voted for the debate in spite of the fact that they had previously identified the gun legislation as an infringement upon our Bill of Rights, making the act one with knowledge and forethought.

JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS Los Angeles Times: With Al Qaeda shattered, U.S. counter-terrorism's future unclear http://www.latimes.c...a-20130415,0... By Ken Dilanian, Los Angeles Times April 14, 2013, 9:09 p.m. WASHINGTON — Skilled in tracking foreign terrorists, Jarret Brachman once was a sought-after expert on Al Qaeda, advising several federal agencies and speaking regularly around the country. Now the former research director of the Combating Terrorism Center, a think tank at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, has turned his focus away from Islamic militants. He spends most of his time consulting with federal, state and local law enforcement agencies about threats from domestic extremists and antigovernment militias. "I have totally re-branded my career," Brachman said. "I still do the Al Qaeda stuff, but there's no interest, no demand.... We've broken Al Qaeda's back, strategically."

LEFTY OBAMA ?? Obama Signs Bill Killing Anti-Corruption, Pro-Transparency STOCK Act Provisions April 16, 2013 Source: Daily Kos Last week, the Senate and House passed a secret, barely-debated bill to limit the scope and effectiveness of the STOCK Act that was passed last year to limit corruption and promote transparency of public officials' financial activity. The purpose of the STOCK Act, which stands for STOP TRADING ON CONGRESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE, is described by the Center of Responsive Politics: The STOCK Act, which was passed by Congress a year ago, requires online posting of the personal financial disclosure statements that lawmakers and congressional candidates, the president and vice president, members of the cabinet and high-ranking congressional and executive branch staff file each year. The data is supposed to be made available in machine readable format that is to be ready to download this October. And at the time of its passage, Obama had this to say: "It's a good first step," he said after passage. "And in the months ahead, Congress should do even more to help fight the destructive influence of money in politics and rebuild the trust between Washington and the American people." Watchdog groups had hailed the passage of the bill last year, as it had wide bi-partisan support and satisfied the public need for added transparency. However, just months after the 2012 election, Congress furtively stripped the bill of major powers: Both chambers of Congress quickly — and near silently — approved the repeal legislation at the end of last week by unanimous consent, just before heading home to their districts. ... The Senate advanced the bill Thursday by unanimous consent, without debate or even briefly describing what it would do. The House signed off on the bill Friday using the same approach. And, unfortunately, yesterday, President Obama completed this rope-a-dope deception by signing this new bill, which stripped key provisions from the STOCK Act and rolled back a lot of the progress that the original bill made in promoting transparency and open government. The bill was signed without any cameras or fanfare, which is in stark It seems President Obama was glad to parade around the signing of the pro-transparency bill, but was not so open about his reversal of the most important parts of it a year later! Open Secrets describes the key provisions stripped out of the bill and labels this action "A reversal of the STOCK Act": The elements of the STOCK Act that were removed include: Creation of searchable, sortable disclosure of the information contained in reports even for Congress, the president, vice president, the president’s cabinet and congressional candidates. Required electronic filing for Congress, the president, vice president, the president’s cabinet and congressional candidates, as well as high-level executive and congressional branch employees. Even images of the staffers' filings will not be available for viewing on the web. The original bill was praised for providing transparency of records to be searchable online, applying to staffers, high-level employees. And this reversal signed yesterday by President Obama will make it even harder to hold public officials accountable and give them less requirements for disclosure. Read More...

Study reveals GMO corn to be highly toxic Posted on April 16, 2013 fromthetrenches RT News A leaked study examining genetically-modified corn reveals that the lab-made alternative to organic crops contains a startling level of toxic chemicals. An anti-GMO website has posted the results of an education-based consulting company’s comparison of corn types, and the results reveal that genetically modified foods may be more hazardous than once thought. The study, the 2012 Corn Comparison Report by Profit Pro, was published recently on the website for Moms Across America March to Label GMOs, a group that says they wish to “raise awareness and support Moms with solutions to eat GMO Free as we demand GMO labeling locally and nationally simultaneously.” They are plotting nationwide protests scheduled for later this year. The report, writes the website’s Zen Honeycutt, was provided by a representative for De Dell Seed Company, an Ontario-based farm that’s touted as being Canadian only non-GMO corn seed company. “The claims that ‘There is no difference between GMO corn and NON Gmo corn’ are false,” says Honeycutt, who adds she was “floored” after reading the study. According to the analysis, GMO corn tested by Profit Pro contains a number of elements absent from traditional cord, including chlorides, formaldehyde and glyphosate. While those elements don’t appear naturally in corn, they were present in GMO samples to the tune of 60 ppm, 200pm and 13 ppm, respectively. Honecutt says that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (FDA) mandates that the level of glyphosate in American drinking water not exceed 0.7 ppm and adds that organ damage in some animals has been linked to glyphosate exposure exceeding 0.1 ppm. “Glyphosate is a strong organic phosphate chelator that immobilizes positively charged minerals such as manganese, cobalt, iron, zinc [and] copper,” Dr. Don Huber attested during a separate GMO study recently released, adding that those elements “are essential for normal physiological functions in soils, plants and animals.” “Glyphosate draws out the vital nutrients of living things and GMO corn is covered with it,” adds Honeycutt, who notes that the nutritional benefits rampant in natural corn are almost entirely removed from lab-made seeds: in the samples used during the study, non-GMO corn is alleged to have 437-times the amount of calcium in genetically modified versions, and 56- and 7-times the level of magnesium and manganese, respectively. These studies come on the heels of a recent decision on Capitol Hill to approve an annual agriculture appropriations bill, even though a provision within the act contained a rider that frees GMO corporations such as the multi-billion-dollar Monsanto Company from liability. The so-called “Monsanto Protection Act,” written by a lawmaker that has lobbied for the agra-giant, says biotech companies won’t need federal approval to test and plant GMO-crops, even if health risks are unknown. “The provision would strip federal courts of the authority to halt the sale and planting of an illegal, potentially hazardous GE crop while the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) assesses those potential hazards,” reads a letter to the House of Representatives that was delivered to Congress last month with the signatures of dozens of food businesses and retailers, as well as interest groups and agencies representing family farmers. “Further, it would compel USDA to allow continued planting of that same crop upon request, even if in the course of its assessment the Department finds that it poses previously unrecognized risks.” http://rt.com/usa/toxic-study-gmo-corn-900/

SHE MADE HER ARTICLE AFTER THIS RELATED SYMPOSIUM. Helen Caldicott Foundation’s Fukushima Symposium Posted on December 27, 2012 Symposium on The Medical and Ecological Impacts of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident To Be Held at the New York Academy of Medicine in March 2013 A unique, two-day symposium at which an international panel of leading medical and biological scientists, nuclear engineers, and policy experts will make presentations on, and discuss the bio-medical and ecological consequences of the Fukushima disaster, will be held at the New York Academy of Medicine on March 11-12, 2013 the second anniversary of the accident. The public is welcome. Chaired by Donald Louria, MD, Chairman Emeritus of the Department of Preventive Medicine and Community Health of the University of Medicine and Denistry, New Jersey, the symposium is a project of the Helen Caldicott Foundation and is open to the public. Confirmed speakers include: Dr. Tim Mousseau, Professor of Biological Sciences, University of South Carolina – Chernobyl, Fukushima and other Hot Places, Biological Consequences Ken Buesseler, Marine Scientist, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute – Consequences for the Ocean of the Fukushima-Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant Accident David Lochbaum, the Union of Concerned Scientists – Another Unsurprising Surprise Dr Wladimir Wertelecki, Chairman Department of Medical Genetics and Birth Defects Center, University South Carolina – Congenital Malformations in Rivne Polossia associated with the Chernobyl Accident Dr. Marek Niedziela, Professor of Pediatrics, Poznan (Poland) University of Medical Sciences – Thyroid Pathology in Children with Particular Reference to Chernobyl and Fukushima Dr. Alexy Yablokov, Russian Academy of Sciences – Lessons from Chernobyl Akio Matsumura, Founder of Global Forum for Parliamentary Leaders on Global Survival – What did the World Learn from the Fukushima Accident? Robert Alvarez, Senior Scholar, Institute for Policy Studies DerBachmannRocker on April 11, 2013 at 8:37 pm said: Link to the official symposium video: http://www.totalwebc...m/view/?id=hcf#

I'm not interested in pursuing tangents on this thread, get back to use with valid evidence in support of the claims from the OP.// END COLBY GOLLY YOU MISSED BELOW IN POST # 1 ???? Now Lord Louis Mountbatten introduced the well-known paedophile Jimmy Savile to Prince Charles. They used to spend quite a bit of time together and go to parties together. A lot of it was under the guise of charity events. On Jimmy Savile's 80th birthday, Prince Charles sent Jimmy Savile a pair of gold cufflinks, a box of cigars, and a note saying "No one will ever know what you've done for this country". There's now just a phenomenal amount of children that Jimmy Savile’s abused. ######################################################## Wed Oct 17, 2012 at 02:29 PM PDT DAILY KOS Jimmy Savile - Pedophile, Friend of Royalty - and the Cover-up to Pervert Justice by rodrus A year ago Sir Jimmy Savile died aged 84. According to his obituaries in the UK media, Savile had been an iconic British broadcaster, a tireless worker for charity, and a close friend of many of the rich and famous including Prince Charles. At the time of Savile’s funeral, the UK Press from the leftwing Guardian to the rightwing Telegraph had eulogised Savile as “a lovely man”, “a national institution”, an “adornment to British public life”, “a friend of royalty and prime ministers” and that “he acted as an unofficial advisor to Prince Charles for several years”. Indeed it was reported that Prince Charles had “lead the tributes to this TV legend”. As Savile had had written on his tombstone - It was good while it lasted. But it couldn’t last for ever. Allegations of Pedophilia A month ago the media’s story had to change as a flood of allegations accused Savile of being a serial pedophile. BBC Presenter Jeremy Vine has described former BBC Presenter Sir Jimmy Savile as “one of the most serious predatory paedophiles in criminal history”. The BBC Director General has made a “heartfelt apology” to the victims, and a senior police officer has described Savile as a “predatory sex offender”. On Oct 7 2012, the Daily Mirror wrote - “for four decades Savile reportedly molested and raped children as young as nine” because no one stopped him. His high level contacts had made him untouchable. So untouchable that it is claimed that Savile, and Gary Glitter (jailed for abusing children in Vietnam), allegedly even used Savile’s dressing room at BBC headquarters for alleged sex with underage girls. But it gets worse. Savile was involved in charitable funding of at least six Orphanages, Children’s Homes and Psychiatric hospitals. He kept private rooms at several of these institutions and it is alleged that some of his victims came from these same care institutions. The Cover-up to Pervert Justice This story is all over the UK mainstream press and you can Google “Jimmy Savile” to view the horrific details for yourself. But the story one can’t view in the UK Press is the cover-up amongst elites that protected Savile from justice for over four decades, as the UK press is too scared of its power elites to get into this. What is surprising is how many people actually complained over the years. The Daily Mirror records how “Charlotte”, a special needs school student, complained of being sexually assaulted on school grounds by Savile -- She was dragged away, put in an isolation cell, and told to apologize for making the accusations. Many complained over the decades; yet none were listened to. A former Sunday Express Editor admitted knowing about Savile 45 years ago - and I suspect many other journalists knew as well, as Savile’s pedophilia was somewhat of an open secret. But complaining was pointless - and perhaps dangerous - because Sir Jimmy Savile was a very well protected man. No such thing as Free Press in UK - Savile was a protected man The first question is why didn’t the press do something to expose this monster years ago; after all his offences go back 50 years and many knew about them? The sad fact is that in Britain the rich and powerful get away with almost anything, including pedophilia, and the UK press have long been cowed into submission. Britain’s largest press baron, Rupert Murdoch, confirmed this recently when he tweeted “Needed to demonstrate no such thing as free press in UK”. Besides Britain’s libel laws are so draconian that they seriously impact freedom of speech and of the press in favour of establishment elites. It wasn’t until Savile died that they were able to pluck up the courage to start printing the long known truth. There now seems to be witch hunts for scapegoats as power elites try to divert attention from themselves. Firstly it was about Savile: removing his tombstone, cancelling his honors, etc. When that wasn’t enough to satisfy the public ire, the attempts to find scapegoats turned to the media’s failure to report the story, or the police’s failure to investigate. But increasingly it seems that Savile was a protected man. One senses that the real question should be the role of the Intelligence/Security services [MI5 / MI6 in UK] and establishment elites in the cover-up. Jimmy Savile, Politicians and Royalty Sir Jimmy Savile’s extraordinary relationships went indeed into the highest levels of the UK Power Elite. Some of these close relationships have already been described in this article, but there is far more to them than that. Savile was for years a regular guest of Margaret Thatcher at her official country house when she was Prime Minister. Savile was close to Royalty, as well, and a frequent visitor to Buckingham Palace, Kensington Palace and Highgrove (Prince Charles’ estate). Indeed Prince Charles had visited Savile at Savile’s retreat in Glencoe, Scotland. There was even a Christmas card in which the Prince wrote “Jimmy, with affectionate greetings from Charles. Give my love to your ladies in Scotland”. The Daily Mail reported in 2011 that Savile had “been used as an intermediary in an attempt to resolve the differences” between Charles and Diana. Indeed the late Princess Diana described Savile as a “sort of mentor to Charles”. Sir Jimmy Savile, Pedophile - Protected by UK Power Elites With these cosy friendships with top politicians and royalty, no wonder Sir Jimmy Savile felt himself to be above the law in England - and the truth is that he was above the law. It’s not just the allegations of Pedophilia against Sir Jimmy Savile that are so shocking, but the fact that these crimes appear to have occurred over a 40 year period that makes them even more appalling. The sad fact is that in the UK and Canada the secret Intelligence/Security Apparatus are known to see part of their role as operating outside the law to illegally protect establishment elites from justice when they do wrong. BBC Presenters are always vetted by the secret intelligence/security services, and friends of royalty and top politicians are also known to be vetted on a regular basis - Savile was both. So it is inconceivable that MI5/6 were unaware of his pedophilia since it had been going on for so long - theirs was the role that hid the truth and protected Savile from justice. An Intelligence Service should be about the quiet collection of information and its analysis; its objective should be getting at the truth. Contrast that with a secret police service who are spreaders of lies, harassers, and bullies; their objective is to hide the truth. My own personal experience is that, in the UK and Canada, the State’s secret intelligence / security apparatus have crossed that line from being honest services that serve the public interest to becoming bully boys for Power Elites. UK Elites Cover-up Pedophilia using MI5/MI6 Nobody - not the public, not police, not journalists, not the judiciary - would dare report a man who is being illegally protected by MI5 or MI6. As many have written there are those in MI6 who see their loyalty to be to the Queen and not to Parliament or the government of the day. They see part of their job as protecting Power Elites from themselves. I have written a research paper, based on my own experiences of this, and on a presentation I made at McMaster University on the subject: http://zersetzen.wikispaces.com It is hard not to opinion that where these UK Elites are involved there is a heedless unconcern for any form of justice. It is even harder not to opinion whether the UK’s Security / Intelligence Apparatus and some of its power elites are fit for purpose. Sir Jimmy Savile was a serial child abuser who mixed with royalty and politicians, and appears to have been shielded from prosecution by the police, the BBC and the security services. Those who protected him from justice are just as guilty as he was.

Get back to us with a source for the supposed report. And then explain why this points to a "depopulation" plot rather than simple corporate greed. ++++++++++++++++ GEE IS KILLING OFF YOUR CUSTOMERS A" intelligent business paradigm" ????? SEEMS THE RUSSIANS ARE NOT INTO THE GMO IDEA AS OF YET. GMO Study Broadcast: Russian GMO Rat Experiment to be Broadcast 24/7 by Lisa Garber October 4th, 2012 Updated 10/31/2012 at 10:30 pm Russian researchers will stream a live experiment to show the effects of GMO feed on rats. This comes after a French study found GMOs to have negative effects on rats, which lead to a provisional Russian suspension on imported Monsanto genetically modified corn. Russian Scientists Condemn GMOs, Plan a Unique Experiment French scientists at the University of Caen sounded the alarm on September 19 after publishing images from their study of tumors on rats fed American GM maize. The National Association for Genetic Safety (NAGS) researchers in Russia have publicly condemned genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and have declared plans to conduct an experiment which members of the public can see, allowing the latter to formulate well-informed opinions about GMOs themselves. These researchers will install web cameras in the cages of four groups of rats. Group 1 will be fed a diet high in GM soybeans and corn. Group 2 will be fed a diet low in GM soybeans and corn. Group 3 will be fed a diet with no GMOs. Group 4 will be fed a diet with standard rat feed. To ensure integrity in the experiment, individuals assigned to tend to the rats will not know what food they are feeding them. “This is a unique experiment,” says project Elena Sharoykina, who is spearheading the project. “There hasn’t been anything like it before—open, public research by opponents and supporters of GMO.” Project to Cost $1 Million If the rats survive (those in the French study became infertile, just as many before them), the experiment will go on for five generations. The public will have to wait until March 2013, however, to see the effects of GMOs while the scientists work out the finer details, such as funding. The research is projected to cost $1 million, which the scientists hope to find in commercial sponsors, government grants, and even public funding. Sharoykina thinks it’s money well spent. “We will have a chance to understand in what direction we should move,” she says. “If this research proves negative influence, and supporters of GMOs accept it, the next step should be a moratorium on products with GMOs in Russia.” Obstacles to Natural Food and GMO Labeling With Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in bed with Monsanto and Dow—as evidenced in a number of political and economic maneuvers, not least of all the removal of 1 million signatures for a GMO labeling campaign—it’s uncertain how easily the United States will end genetic modification practices. Researchers across the world have already provided ample evidence of GMO’s harmful effects, including weight gain, organ disruption, infertility, tumor development, and the development of resistant weeds and pests. The push for change to natural, organic food and GMO labeling must come from the public. Additional Sources: Read more: http://naturalsociet.../#ixzz2QcP9H3HF

The Orwellian Paradigm: Killing You for Your Own Safety By Faisal Moghul Global Research, April 15, 2013 antiwar.com =============================== Almost thirty years ago, cultural critic Neil Postman argued in Amusing Ourselves to Death that television’s gradual replacement of the printing press has created a dumbed-down culture driven by mindless entertainment. In this context, Postman claimed that Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World correctly foresaw our dystopian future, as opposed to George Orwell’s 1984.Contrary to Postman’s critique, however, the principles of Newspeak and doublethink dominate modern political discourse. Their widespread use is a testament to Orwell’s profound insight into how language can be manipulated to restrict human thought. WAR IS PEACE Formulating the Language of Perpetual War – From AUMF to “Associates of Associates.” The semantic deception began shortly after September 11, 2001. “Our war on terror begins with al Qaeda,” Bush said in his State of the Union address, “but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated (emphasis added).” The defining feature of this rhetoric is that it declares war on a particular method of violence used by disaffected states or groups. In fact, the phrase “war on terror” functions as what semiotics calls a floating signifier, a term devoid of any real meaning and thus open to any interpretation. Terrorism has no shape, mass, or boundary; it is an abstraction, a tactic of asymmetrical warfare used to achieve political goals. Imagine if Franklin D. Roosevelt had declared “war on surprise attacks” in the wake Pearl Harbor, or if Lyndon Johnson had vowed to defeat guerilla warfare in Vietnam. This linguistic construct, therefore, ensures an open-ended conflict with no conceivable end. Unperturbed by this paradox, British Prime Minister Tony Blair dutifully reiterated that, “the fact is we are at war with terrorism.” But the bombing sorties over Afghanistan had barely begun when the label morphed into “The Long War,” and then the “decisive ideological struggle of the 21st century and the calling of our generation.” And now, the targeted killings program has been “extended to militant groups” with no connection to September 11, 2001 – that is, “associates of associates.” Removing the requirement for any linkage to al-Qaeda gives the government unfettered discretion to assassinate anyone without due process of law. This phraseology makes it impossible to distinguish the dialectical concepts of war and peace. It makes peace synonymous with a state of warfare. Peace is defined in terms of a generational commitment to war and, in turn, war is framed as a necessity to keep the peace. In other words, War is Peace. This is the lexicon of perpetual war, the vocabulary of a conflict that is never meant to end. “You can’t end the war,” as one official admits to the Washington Post, “if you keep adding people to the enemy who are not actually part of the original enemy.” Aggression is Self-Defense –Waging Full Scale War to Prevent War. Operation Iraqi Freedom represented phase two in a linguistic framework meant to fuse two diametrically opposite concepts in the public mind: preemption and prevention. The purpose of preemptive war is to thwart or neutralize an imminent attack – one that is “instant, overwhelming, and leaving no choice of means, and no moment for deliberation” – without absorbing the first blow. Conversely, preventive war is pure aggression – it is not tied to any notion of imminence and is primarily directed at securing some strategic advantage. Thus, the dimension of time is the primary difference between the former and the latter. The Bush Doctrine blurred the lines between preventive and preemptive wars. It represented a seismic shift in national security strategy from one dominated by the Cold War doctrines of deterrence and containment, to one that now enshrined preventive war as a permanent feature of US policy. During his 2002 commencement speech at West Point, Bush stated: “If we wait for threats to fully materialize we will have waited too long…Yet the war on terror will not be won on the defensive. We must take the battle to the enemy, disrupt his plans and confront the worst threats before they emerge…” (emphasis added).” Furthermore, the 2006 US National Security Strategy Paper states that “If necessary, however, under long-standing principles of self-defense, we do not rule out the use of force before attacks occur, even if uncertainty remains as to the time and place of the enemy’s attack” (emphasis added). In true Newspeak fashion, such a conception of “preemptive action” inverts the traditional model of self-defense under customary international law by rendering imminence completely irrelevant. In doing so, it strips self-defense of any practical meaning. It conflates preventive war with preemptive war; it packages aggression as self-defense. But as Cheney’s one-percent doctrine later revealed, the threat need not even be likely, let alone imminent, for self-defense (read aggression) to apply. According to this logic, even a one percent chance of an event occurring is sufficient to treat it as a certainty. “It’s not about our analysis,” Cheney reportedly said, “…It’s about our response (emphasis added).” Put simply, the likelihood of an event occurring is not a necessary prerequisite to wage war. This embeds the supreme international crime of aggressive war in the fabric of national security policy. Aggression is self-defense, Winston. FREEDOM IS SLAVERY The Obama Administration gave the War on Terror a facelift by rebranding it “Overseas Contingency Operations.” But the sanitizing nomenclature has done little to halt the institutionalization of the apparatus of tyranny– from Kill Lists to Disposition Matrices to Drone Playbooks to indefinite detentions to persecuting whistleblowers to pervasive domestic surveillance. These developments are strikingly at odds with the post-9/11 metanarrative that frames this conflict as a clash between the forces of freedom and despotism. As Bush phrased it: “Americans are asking, why do they hate us? They hate what we see right here in this Chamber, a democratically elected government. Their leaders are self-appointed. They hate our freedoms – our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other.” From this point onward, spreading ‘freedom and democracy’ abroad became the rallying point for a nation enraptured by its new messianic role. But it soon became apparent that freedom at home cannot coexist with hyper-militarism abroad. Accusation Is Guilt – Killing You for Your Own Safety. What could be more destructive to the cherished freedoms that make America a “shining city on a hill” than giving a “high level official” the power to kill Americans on US soil without any due process, accountability or transparency? What could be more Orwellian than asserting such dictatorial authority, which has always been the hallmark of totalitarian states, in the name of protecting the public’s safety? The cost of war is not measured solely in terms of blood and treasure. War also corrodes human morality to a point where even the most inhumane acts become perfectly acceptable. In fact, summary executions without due process and the right to a fair trial served as one of the justifications for removing Saddam Hussein’s regime. Not only does the recent Department of Justice White Paper resoundingly affirm this power grab, it also destroys the foundation of Anglo-American jurisprudence by nullifying the principle of ‘innocent until proven guilty.’ It eviscerates the Fifth Amendment, which prohibits any deprivation of “life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” It obliterates the protections afforded by the Sixth Amendment, including the “right to a speedy and public trial,” by asserting that government allegations alone, based on secret evidence, are sufficient to establish guilt. Accusation is guilt, Winston. As Glenn Greenwald cogently observes: “But of course, when this memo refers to “a Senior Operational Leader of al-Qaida”, what it actually means is this: someone whom the President – in total secrecy and with no due process – has accused of being that. Indeed, the memo itself makes this clear, as it baldly states that presidential assassinations are justified when “an informed, high-level official of the US government has determined that the targeted individual poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the US. This is the crucial point: the memo isn’t justifying the due-process-free execution of senior al-Qaida leaders who pose an imminent threat to the US. It is justifying the due-process-free execution of people secretly accused by the president and his underlings, with no due process, of being that (emphasis in original).” Rarely do apologists for the normalization of extra-judicial murder realize that this represents a permanent erosion of core liberties, an ever-lasting debasement of the Bill of Rights. “We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it,” Orwell said. “Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power.” Secret assassinations are here to stay. The Great Shift Inward — From Enemy Combatants to Homegrown Terrorists. Under international law, captured enemy soldiers are considered Prisoners of War (POWs), and thus shielded by the Geneva Conventions and the jus cogens prohibition against torture. Furthermore, terrorism was traditionally treated as a federal criminal offense before 9/11. Accordingly, those accused of terrorism could still invoke the protections of the Bill of Rights, including the right to counsel, right to a jury trial, right to confront one’s accusers, right against self-incrimination and conviction based on guilt proven beyond a reasonable doubt. As the 2002 Padilla Case demonstrated, however, the enemy combatant doctrine creates a category of detainees that are neither POWs nor terrorists. As such, they are beyond the reach of both the Bill of Rights and Geneva Conventions. This undefined label essentially circumvents the safeguards of the legal system and allows the state to treat the accused like a medieval King would a serf. It sets the groundwork for a parallel gulag system in the United States operating on the model of indefinite detention without charge or trial, no access to a lawyer, and confessions obtained through torture. And then came Attorney General Holder’s recent premonition about a new threat: the “homegrown terrorist.” Speaking to ABC news, Holder’s statement signals a decisive shift in the script governing the ongoing campaign: “It’s a very serious threat. I think what it says is that the scope, our scope, has to be broadened. We can’t think that it’s just a bunch of people in caves in some part of the world. We have to be concerned about the homeland to the same extent that we are worried about the threat coming from overseas” (emphasis added). The implications of this statement are staggering, for it turns the United States into the new “battlefield.” Systems of tyranny perfected abroad are always turned inward. It only took a decade for the same tactics of warfare that were previously restricted to foreign countries to now being applied domestically. Responding to Senator Rand Paul’s question whether the President can authorize drone strikes on US citizens on domestic soil, Holder revealingly states that “It is possible…to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States.” Even though the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 generally prohibits military involvement in domestic law enforcement, notice how Holder sees no problem with the military, not police, using lethal force against Americans on US soil. Furthermore, when combined with the DOJ White Paper’s assertion that drone assassinations do “not require that the US have clear evidence that a specific attack . . . will take place in the immediate future,” it becomes frighteningly clear that an anonymous “high level official” can deploy these “faceless ambassadors of death” to strike you dead anytime, even absent any imminent or likely threat. This gives government the power of God. It repudiates every principle of liberty this constitutional republic was founded upon. This is no exaggeration, as Holder’s follow-up response to Senator Paul clarifies: “Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil? The answer to that question is no (emphasis added).” As any lawyer can attest, Holder’s heavily qualified statement creates more ambiguity. Note the following points: (1) Holder is not saying that the President cannot kill an American on US soil. The phrasing of his question is much narrower, which can arguably be interpreted as allowing the President to kill without using “weaponized drones;” (2) most important of all, his statement implies that the President does have the authority to kill Americans “engaged in combat.” Hence, the issue of how “combat” is defined carries great importance. In this regard, William Grigg brilliantly points out that al-Awlaki’s assassination sets a precedent that stretches the interpretation of “combat” to a point where there are few, if any, restraints on the Presidents power to kill: “Combat” can consist of expressing support for Muslims mounting armed resistance against U.S. military aggression, which was the supposed crime committed by Anwar al-Awlaki, or sharing the surname and DNA of a known enemy of the state, which was the offense committed by Awlaki’s 16-year-old son, Abdel. Under the rules of engagement used by the Obama Regime in Pakistan, Yemen, and Afghanistan, any “military-age” male found within a targeted “kill zone” is likewise designated a “combatant,” albeit usually after the fact.” More than half a century ago Orwell had warned us that the scourge of war eventually turns inward. “The war is waged by each ruling group against its own subjects, and the object of the war is not to make or prevent conquests of territory, but to keep the structure of society intact. The very word “war”, therefore, has become misleading” (emphasis added). Stated differently, war becomes a buzzword for concealing a rather insidious internal dynamic, one that treats those who oppose the status quo – the intrepid whistleblower, the outspoken journalist, the vocal activist – as a legitimate target for persecution. Dissent Is Treason. It is precisely the ability to express unpopular opinions and the autonomy to diverge from convention without fear of persecution that makes any society free. As Edward R. Murrow reminded us during the McCarthy era, dissent should never be confused with disloyalty because “we are not descended from fearful men […] who feared to write, to speak, to associate, and to defend causes that were, for the moment, unpopular.” That same principle holds true today, regardless of the nature of the claimed emergency. Bradley Manning was caged like an animal under insanity inducing conditions for more than two and a half yearswithout trial. Manning’s treatment is an epiphenomenon of the current administration’s unprecedented war against whistleblowers, which makes an example of any lowly prole who dare expose corruption at the highest levels of the Inner Party. John Kiriakou rots in prison for the “crime” of informing the people about the CIA’s illegal waterboarding, whereas John Brennan ascends to the heights of power for endorsing torture and assassinations. The operative effect of such incidents is to create a culture of intimidation and silence by making it a “thoughtcrime” to deviate from the official version of events. Investigative journalist Chris Hedges points out that the NDAA (the Homeland Battlefield Bill) “permits the military to detain anyone, including U.S. citizens, who ‘substantially support’—an undefined legal term—al-Qaida, the Taliban or ‘associated forces,’ again a term that is legally undefined.” This represents a clear step toward the criminalization of activities that were formerly protected under the First Amendment. It equates any meaningful dissent with treason. As if this weren’t bad enough, some government employees are told to view “protests” as a form of “low-level terrorism,” and consider “Fury at the West for reasons ranging from personal problems to global policies of the U.S.” as a potential indicator of terrorist activity. Recall that the PATRIOT Act was also billed a necessary counterterrorism tool. Even though it vastly expanded the state’s investigative power without any attendant checks and balances, Congress was given no time to read it due to the claimed exigency of the circumstances. Almost a decade later, however, its application has been expanded to ordinary, non-terrorism cases like drug dealing and child pornography. Understanding how this process works is vital, for tyranny always treads a familiar path: first it clamors for unfettered authority to resolve some overriding problem; then it consolidates that power; next it gradually expands its vocabulary and application; finally, it turns around and uses that power to persecute everyone. Indeed, those who wield unrestrained power will inevitably abuse it. Big Brother Is Watching You – Argus, TrapWire, Stingray, EARS and Total Information Awareness. Reporting on DARPA’s most recent project called Effective Affordable Reusable Speech-to-text (EARS), Wired magazine reports that “Darpa wants to make systems so accurate, you’ll be able to easily record, transcribe and recall all the conversations you ever have.” It’s a “little freaky,” the author admits, since it gives those who wield this technology total omniscience – the power to know everything about everyone at any time. The parallels to 1984 are obvious: “Always the eyes watching you and the voice enveloping you. Asleep or awake, working or eating, indoors or out of doors, in the bath or in bed — no escape. Nothing was your own except the few cubic centimetres inside your skull(emphasis added).” The only vestige of privacy is in one’s own mind – for now at least. But even though the average citizen’s privacy has been eviscerated, the government continues to operate at unprecedented levels of secrecy. As the Associated Press reports: …the government cited national security to withhold information at least 5,223 times — a jump over 4,243 such cases in 2011 and 3,805 cases in Obama’s first year in office.The secretive CIA last year became even more secretive: Nearly 60 percent of 3,586 requests for files were withheld or censored for that reason last year, compared with 49 percent a year earlier. In that context, privacy is not dead per se; it is flourishing insofar as the government’s inner workings are concerned. IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH. “They could be made to accept the most flagrant violations of reality…and were not sufficiently interested in public events to notice what was happening. By lack of understanding they remained sane. They simply swallowed everything…” Like Orwell’s Ministry of Truth, the opinion molders – the handful of corporations that control the flow of information – sanitize reality to cover for even the worst cases of executive wrongdoing. Their paternalism regards people as mere casual observers to be controlled, not stakeholders to be informed about the democratic process. Their function is to control the narrative of events, for “Who controls the past, controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.” Oceania Has Always Never Been At War With East Asia. Orwell explained doublethink as “holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them…To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just as long as it is needed…” A recently declassified memorandumwritten by former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld in 2001, almost a year and a half before Operation Iraqi Freedom, adds to the plethora of evidence that Rumsfeld, along with the rest of the neoconservative war hawks, concocted false pretexts to market the invasion of Iraq. The same Donald Rumsfeld, who invoked Saddam Hussein’s non-existent Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs) as a casus belli to invade Iraq in 2003, previously armed the same Iraqi dictator with chemical and biological weapons as Ronald Reagans Middle East envoy during the 1980s. Oceania was never at war with East Asia. But this was an inconvenient fact in the prelude to Operation Iraqi Freedom, and therefore had to be forgotten. It never happened. “Everything faded into mist. The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became truth.” Oceania has always been at war with East Asia. Conclusion – The Grand Contradiction. In a historical irony, Orwell’s proposed preface to Animal Farm about censorship in the English press was suppressed and remained undiscovered for years after his death. In it, Orwell mounts a principled defense of intellectual freedom during a time when the western press brooked no criticism of Joseph Stalin or his murderous regime. “These people don’t see that if you encourage totalitarian methods, the time may come when they will be used against you instead of for you,” Orwell warned. “Make a habit of imprisoning Fascists without trial, and perhaps the process won’t stop at Fascists.” Make a habit of endorsing drone strikes in far off lands, and perhaps the next drone will show up in your neighborhood. In conclusion, the grand contradiction lurking behind all the rhetorical smoke screens is simply this: in trying to rid the world of evil using the tactics of evil, we unleash even greater horrors; we become what we seek to destroy.

In a report published on the 11th of April French daily Le Monde admits that rebels fighting the government of the Syrian Arab Republic are dominated by Japhat Al Nosra, a terrorist group linked to Al Qaida. OK so one report from one MSM outlet reports something that contradicts almost every other source (not tied the Syrian gov't and its allies) and this chooses to focus on that one to the exclusion of the others. This is known as 'cherry picking'.// END COLBY ++++++++++++++++++++ LOL !!! US Sponsored Syria “Opposition” declares Allegiance to Al Qaeda By Niall Green Global Research, April 16, 2013 World Socialist Web Site ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Last week the Al Nusra Front, the military backbone of the US-sponsored Syrian opposition, openly swore its loyalty to Al Qaeda. Al Nusra leader Abu Mohammed al-Golani pledged allegiance to Al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri, the Egyptian-born cleric who served for many years as Osama bin Laden’s second-in-command. “The sons of Al Nusra Front pledge allegiance to Sheikh Ayman al-Zawahiri,” al-Golani said in a recorded message released last week. The statement also indicated that the Syrian terrorist group would merge with Al Qaeda in Iraq, from which Al Nusra has received personnel and training. Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the head of the Islamic State in Iraq, Al Qaeda’s affiliate in that country, said last week that his group would join with Al Nusra under the shared banner of “The Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant.” The Al Nusra Front (or Jabhat al-Nusra) became the most effective armed group in the US-backed Syrian opposition last year. Its cadres, Islamist militants recruited internationally with combat experience from other wars, have inflicted several defeats on Syrian government forces, while carrying out sectarian atrocities against minority groups and alleged regime sympathizers. The Free Syrian Army (FSA), the loose coalition of militias sponsored by Washington and its allies in their proxy war against the government of President Bashar al-Assad, issued a statement disavowing any formal ties with Al Nusra. “We don’t support the ideology of Al Nusra,” an FSA spokesman said. “There has never been and there will never be a decision at the command level to coordinate with Al Nusra.” This denial appears meaningless, however, as the FSA then admitted that it planned to continue co-operating with Al Nusra fighterson “certain operations.” Without Al Nusra, the FSA would have very limited fighting capabilities. In July 2012, the UK-based Guardian newspaper reported from within Syria that the FSA frequently relied on al-Nusra when fighting the Syrian army. In the piece, titled “Al-Qaeda turns tide for rebels in battle for eastern Syria,” FSA personnel said that they had called upon Al Nusra to carry out truck and car bombings, plant roadside bombs, and to supply fighters, small arms and ordnance. The FSA lacks a popular base of support, and appears to have little operational authority, within Syria. Rather, it is various sectarian and ethnic-based militias that carry out strikes against the Syrian regime, each for their own ends. Among these groups, it is Al Nusra that has proved to be the most deadly. Its militants, drawn to the Syrian war under the banner of Islamist jihad, are recruited from the ranks of Sunni extremist veterans of the wars in Chechnya, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya. Its shadowy leader, al-Golani (his nom de guerre ), is believed to have been a fighter in the Al Qaeda-linked insurgency in Iraq during the US occupation and subsequent ethno-sectarian civil war in that country. Al Nusra has claimed responsibility for the overwhelming majority of suicide bombings inside Syria, including the December 2011 twin-suicide attack in Damascus that killed 49 people and injured over 160 others, the May 2012 bombing in the capital in which 55 people died and some 400 were wounded, and a triple suicide attack in Aleppo in October, which killed 48. In all these atrocities, and hundreds of other attacks carried out by the group over the past fifteen months, the majority of casualties have been civilians. Al Nusra’s formal declaration of solidarity with Al Qaeda thus comes more as an inconvenience than a surprise to the Obama administration and its allies. Islamist militias, including those associated with Al Qaeda, have received hundreds of millions of dollars in cash and materiel from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and other US-backed forces—all under the watchful eye of the CIA, whose agents oversee the flow of supplies to the Syrian opposition across the borders of Turkey and Jordan. On Thursday, the Assad government called on the UN to designate Al Nusra as a terrorist organization, like Al Qaeda. In a letter to the UN Security Council, the Syrian foreign ministry claimed that the announced merger confirmed previous assertions by Damascus that Al Nusra is engaged in terrorist crimes against the Syrian people. The letter to the Security Council criticized the efforts within the “international community” to prevent Al Nusra from being branded as a terrorist organization, with the Assad regime attempting to put diplomatic pressure on US allies, such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar, which have sponsored the Islamist fighters. Washington was compelled to officially blacklist Al Nusra as a terrorist group in December. The designation came in the context of the establishment in November 2012 of a new US-sponsored anti-Assad umbrella group, the National Coalition for Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces. Al Nusra was hostile to this group, which includes moderate Sunnis as well as secular and Kurdish personnel. The terrorist label applied to Al Nusra by the Obama administration was mainly symbolic, however. In the months since the designation, al-Golani’s fighters have proven themselves even more capable of striking at Syrian regime targets and carrying out terrorist attacks. On December 23, al-Nusra declared a “no-fly zone” over the city of Aleppo, the main commercial center of Syria prior to the civil war. According to Al Jazeera, the group was able to deploy 23mm and 57mm anti-aircraft guns against Syrian armed forces aircraft, as well as civilian planes that were suspected of carrying government personnel or supplies. Al-Nusra has emerged as the principal opposition group in the battle for control of Aleppo, which lies close to the Turkish border and the large US Air Force base at Incirlik. It regularly fights off Syrian government assaults on rebel-held areas. Given the extensive presence of the US military and the CIA in and around Syria, and Washington’s influence within the despotic Persian Gulf sheikhdoms that bankroll the opposition, it is inconceivable that Al Nusra or similar outfits could function without tacit support from US imperialism. Secretary of State John Kerry effectively acknowledged that the US would turn a blind eye to the arming of al-Nusra during a press conference last month with Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber al-Thani, a Qatari royal. Kerry insisted that Washington was doing everything to ensure that support went to the “right people” in the Syrian opposition. He added, however, that there could be “no one hundred percent guarantee” that the flood of arms and money coming into Syria from the US and its allies would not end up in the hands of the local branch of al-Qaeda.

Once again Gaal tries to derail a thread with irrelevant Spam. ++++++++++++++ WELL GOOD COLBY KNOWS WHO DID IT !!! TELL US LEN TELL US !!!!!

============== OH !! BUT I WAITING FOR FBI HELPER 'friend ' to testify against the kook (useful idiot); Effect gun control debate ?? yup....yup..... A bombing incident might "Effect gun control debate ??" You have forever forfeited the right to question anyone else's intellectual capacity (not that you had any right to before) ++++++++++++++++ A 2nd amendment advocate BOMBS an event Dedicated to the Newtown Victims (as the Race was) and it wouldnt effect the gun debate ?????????????????????????????? Moron may refer to: Moron (psychology), disused term for a person with a mental age between 8 and 12, and a common insult for a person considered stupid (or just a generic insult) "Moron" (Sum 41 song) "Moron" (KMFDM song) Moron (bacteriophage), an extra gene in prophage genomes that do not have a phage function in the lysogenic cycle Moron (Book of Mormon), a name and a location in the Book of Mormon Moron (mountain), in the Jura Mountains Moron, California, later renamed to Taft Morón, Cuba, a city in the middle of Cuba Morón, Buenos Aires, a city in Greater Buenos Aires Morón Partido, a district in Buenos Aires Province Morón, Venezuela, a town in northern Venezuela Mörön, a town in Mongolia Morón de la Frontera, Spain, home to Morón Air Base. MORON LEN COLBY

Saudi Connection to the 9/11 Hijackers The hijackers’ training records from several U.S. flight schools indicate that they were marginal pilots, at best, even in single-engine airplanes. In early 2000, three of the pilot/hijackers are heavily documented at a small flight school near Venice, Florida, while the fourth attended schools in Arizona and California. This would account for the basic flight training of the pilots but in no way can explain the expert level of airmanship required for the 911 hit. Dozens of reports focused on the pilot/hijackers Mohamed Atta, Hani Hanjour, Ziad Jarrah and Marwan al-Shehhi. Flight instructors around the United States told similar stories of attempting to train them. All four had a very difficult time in their basic training on small, single-engine airplanes. The English-speaking instructors repeatedly cited the language barrier with the Arabic-speaking students as a major obstacle and said that they had encouraged the students to quit. Obviously, this language issue had found a solution by 911; the only logical solution is that Arabic-speaking flight instructors were used, more specifically, Arabic-speaking Boeing flight instructors. By using small flight schools for basic flight training, the cell remained below the radar, while the pilots’ documented use of the schools could be counted on later to provide some sort of explanation (albeit a very weak one) as to how they learned to fly these complicated heavy jets, and might help keep investigators off the trail of the real training. But the leap from a small 4,000-pound single-engine propeller airplane to a 300,000-pound twin-engine jetliner needs a specific explanation. For instance, it took me 20 years, dozens of ground school courses and 15,000 hours between my first lesson and taking command of my first commercial airliner. Adding computer games and outdated simulators to their training was a helpful step, but until they actually felt the yoke and added the hours of experience it takes to understand the momentum of a heavy 767, they would be all over the sky and completely out of control. Not only were they under control, they flew above the average skills required to operate in an airline environment. This miraculous leap has only one explanation: expert and repeated training in the actual Boeing 757 or 767. And by all indications, this took place in the final months of preparation, during the spring and summer of 2001. There are two different worlds in aviation — the general single-engine airplane world with a service ceiling of 10,000 feet and a top speed of around 200 miles per hour, and the commercial swept-wing jetliner world at 40,000 feet and Mach numbers for speed calculations. Little within that first world prepares the pilot for the second, high-altitude world. So began my search for Middle Eastern operators of Boeing airliners. Because the hijackers were mostly Saudi Arabian, the firm of Dallah Avco, a Saudi operator of multiple private Boeing airliners, soon stood out as a focal point. To my amazement, I immediately discovered that Congressional investigators had already linked Dallah Avco with the actual hijackers. Omar Bayoumi, a Dallah employee and operative within the Saudi Ministry of Aviation, had provided housing and basic support for three hijackers: Nawaf al-Hazmi, Khalid al-Mihdhar and the pilot/hijacker of American 77, Hani Hanjour. FBI evidence of the cell would confirm that the hijacking team of American 77 had formed and operated separately with direct financial support from top-level members of the Saudi government, bitter enemies of al Qaeda. The picture was beginning to clear. From this point in the research, the guilt needle began pointing steadily toward Saudi Arabia, in part because 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudis. With every new piece of evidence, that needle does not fluctuate. As the focus narrowed on San Diego, the footprints of a large Saudi contingent began to appear. Congressional investigators had found, within buried FBI files, evidence that United States Senators would later call “undeniable” that top Saudi officials had known that terrorists were entering the U.S. beginning in 2000 in preparation for some sort of attack. These same officials are among those who work with American oil companies and regulate the flow of crude oil to the United States, the same Saudi officials that regulate the price that has gone from $30 per barrel to over $140 post 911. One Saudi official in particular, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, Saudi Ambassador to the United States from 1983 to 2005, was quickly traced to direct funding of the hijackers, through cashier’s checks, not from him he would say, but from his wife. Alabama Senator Richard Shelby, Maine Senator Susan Collins and Florida Senator Bob Graham learned that Saudi officials had directed agents in the United States to assist the future hijackers. These senators would quietly back out of the investigation after the White House threatened them with “leaking classified information” and a criminal probe. Senator Graham was told in no uncertain terms to back off and shut up in telephone calls from Vice President Cheney. This evidence alone on the Saudis provided more plausibility than two chapters of KSM’s ramblings. Here was opportunity to provide airplanes and instructors for hijackers who were solidly linked to Saudi operatives working for Prince Bandar. ##################### From False Flag 9/11 by Philip Marshall- Chapter 16 It takes a close reading of an innocuous-looking statement within the 911 Commission’s report to realize that a huge entourage of the longtime Saudi Intelligence Minister, Prince Turki al Faisal, was in Las Vegas on September 11, 2001. Tucked in the back of the report was an account of three separate chartered airliners carrying dozens of Saudis, departing from Las Vegas on midnight transatlantic flights beginning on September 19th. We now know that this group, including Prince Turki, with deep connections to Saudi Arabia’s secret police, was in Las Vegas during the time that the 911 Commission could not explain why all the hijackers had made trips to Las Vegas. The roster of Saudi officials in the United States on September 11 includes the Defense Minister, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Minister of Aviation and the head of Dallah Avco Group, in addition to Prince Turki and of course Prince Bandar, Saudi ambassador to the U.S. In addition, the head of two of Saudi Arabia’s holiest mosques stayed at the same hotel as the all-Saudi hijackers of AA77 — at the Marriott Residence Inn in Herndon, Virginia — on the night of September 10th. In the week after the attack, there were a dozen chartered flights with high-ranking Saudi officials that left from Las Vegas, Newark, Boston and Washington, all cities, by the way, with direct links to the hijackings. By September 24, 2001, they had all returned home. The British Observer reported that the widely feared Prince Turki al Faisal had a long, mutually hostile relationship with Osama bin Laden. Turki, with American connections (he would become Saudi Ambassador to the U.S. after Prince Bandar), was funding bin Laden’s mujahedeen against the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 1980s, but the partnership with bin Laden ended soon after. More recently, the entire Saudi royal family had become the prime target of al-Qaeda for their relationship with American oil companies. Of great interest is the Observer’s reporting that pilot/hijacker Mohamed Atta left Hamburg soon after making contact with Prince Turki’s intelligence agents in early 2000. Atta’s destination, after a brief stop in Pakistan, was Huffman Aviation, the small school in Florida where he began basic flight training. He was soon joined by Jarrah and al Shehhi. They told people in Venice that they were bodyguards with the Saudi government and needed to learn to fly airplanes. The prince’s entourage entailed a perfect opportunity for the Raiders to get the needed Saudi Boeing flight instructors into the country, and exit after the attacks without anyone interviewing them. The chartered departures from Las Vegas were a four-engine DC-8 for Geneva on September 19, 2001 with 69 passengers, including 46 Saudis; a Boeing 727 for England with 18 Saudis on September 20; and on September 23, a jumbo Lockheed L-1011 for Paris. Only 34 passengers were listed on that plane, which has a capacity of nearly 400. On that flight was Prince Turki. No one in the government will say just who cleared these flights to leave without interviewing even one of the passengers. Prince Bandar said on Meet the Press in September 2001 that the FBI cleared the flights. The FBI said that they did not clear the flights. Prince Turki and Prince Bandar have more connections to Arabic-speaking Boeing flight instructors than anyone else in the world. The means and opportunity to slip the hijackers into Pinal Airpark or other facilities for training were theirs. The motive was a world-changing event. The Saudis would benefit greatly not only from the targeting of al-Qaeda but from an American invasion of Iraq, one that they had begged for after the first Gulf War. Dick Cheney would guarantee Prince Bandar that America was going to invade Iraq months before anyone informed the United States Congress. In November 2001, Prince Turki expressed his public support for the U.S. operation in Afghanistan, referring to al-Qaeda as an “evil cult.” By calling out bin Laden for complicity in the attacks, he would be helping to “sic” the world against his greatest enemy, an enemy that has made several assassination attempts against the Saudi royal family. In the winter of 1998, three buried suitcases had been found in Saudi Arabia containing nine antitank Sagger missiles. The Saudis learned that al-Qaeda was intending them for use against the royal family. Former FBI Director Louis Freeh told The New Yorker, “From where I sat and from what I knew … Al Qaeda was more a threat to Saudi Arabia than to the U.S. and bin Laden’s whole focus was on toppling the royal family and getting the U.S. forces out of Saudi Arabia.”

WANT ANSWERS? WHO TRAINED THE 9/11 HIJACKERS TO FLY BOEING JETLINERS FROM FALSE FLAG 9/11 BY PHILIP MARSHALL The hijackers’ training records from several U.S. flight schools indicate that they were marginal pilots, at best, even in single-engine airplanes. In early 2000, three of the pilot/hijackers are heavily documented at a small flight school near Venice, Florida, while the fourth attended schools in Arizona and California. This would account for the basic flight training of the pilots but in no way can explain the expert level of airmanship required for the 911 hit. Dozens of reports focused on the pilot/hijackers Mohamed Atta, Hani Hanjour, Ziad Jarrah and Marwan al-Shehhi. Flight instructors around the United States told similar stories of attempting to train them. All four had a very difficult time in their basic training on small, single-engine airplanes. The English-speaking instructors repeatedly cited the language barrier with the Arabic-speaking students as a major obstacle and said that they had encouraged the students to quit. Obviously, this language issue had found a solution by 911; the only logical solution is that Arabic-speaking flight instructors were used, more specifically, Arabic-speaking Boeing flight instructors. By using small flight schools for basic flight training, the cell remained below the radar, while the pilots’ documented use of the schools could be counted on later to provide some sort of explanation (albeit a very weak one) as to how they learned to fly these complicated heavy jets, and might help keep investigators off the trail of the real training. But the leap from a small 4,000-pound single-engine propeller airplane to a 300,000-pound twin-engine jetliner needs a specific explanation. For instance, it took me 20 years, dozens of ground school courses and 15,000 hours between my first lesson and taking command of my first commercial airliner. Adding computer games and outdated simulators to their training was a helpful step, but until they actually felt the yoke and added the hours of experience it takes to understand the momentum of a heavy 767, they would be all over the sky and completely out of control. Not only were they under control, they flew above the average skills required to operate in an airline environment. This miraculous leap has only one explanation: expert and repeated training in the actual Boeing 757 or 767. And by all indications, this took place in the final months of preparation, during the spring and summer of 2001. There are two different worlds in aviation — the general single-engine airplane world with a service ceiling of 10,000 feet and a top speed of around 200 miles per hour, and the commercial swept-wing jetliner world at 40,000 feet and Mach numbers for speed calculations. Little within that first world prepares the pilot for the second, high-altitude world. So began my search for Middle Eastern operators of Boeing airliners. Because the hijackers were mostly Saudi Arabian, the firm of Dallah Avco, a Saudi operator of multiple private Boeing airliners, soon stood out as a focal point. To my amazement, I immediately discovered that Congressional investigators had already linked Dallah Avco with the actual hijackers. Omar Bayoumi, a Dallah employee and operative within the Saudi Ministry of Aviation, had provided housing and basic support for three hijackers: Nawaf al-Hazmi, Khalid al-Mihdhar and the pilot/hijacker of American 77, Hani Hanjour. FBI evidence of the cell would confirm that the hijacking team of American 77 had formed and operated separately with direct financial support from top-level members of the Saudi government, bitter enemies of al Qaeda. The picture was beginning to clear. From this point in the research, the guilt needle began pointing steadily toward Saudi Arabia, in part because 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudis. With every new piece of evidence, that needle does not fluctuate. As the focus narrowed on San Diego, the footprints of a large Saudi contingent began to appear. Congressional investigators had found, within buried FBI files, evidence that United States Senators would later call “undeniable” that top Saudi officials had known that terrorists were entering the U.S. beginning in 2000 in preparation for some sort of attack. These same officials are among those who work with American oil companies and regulate the flow of crude oil to the United States, the same Saudi officials that regulate the price that has gone from $30 per barrel to over $140 post 911. One Saudi official in particular, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, Saudi Ambassador to the United States from 1983 to 2005, was quickly traced to direct funding of the hijackers, through cashier’s checks, not from him he would say, but from his wife. Alabama Senator Richard Shelby, Maine Senator Susan Collins and Florida Senator Bob Graham learned that Saudi officials had directed agents in the United States to assist the future hijackers. These senators would quietly back out of the investigation after the White House threatened them with “leaking classified information” and a criminal probe. Senator Graham was told in no uncertain terms to back off and shut up in telephone calls from Vice President Cheney. This evidence alone on the Saudis provided more plausibility than two chapters of KSM’s ramblings. Here was opportunity to provide airplanes and instructors for hijackers who were solidly linked to Saudi operatives working for Prince Bandar. Something about this jogged my memory. In the spring and summer of 2001, I had noticed an odd airplane frequently parked on the corporate ramp at Lindbergh Field in San Diego. My schedule in 2001 was heavy with San Diego trips and I became curious about the highly unusual airplane with its tail number registration HZ-124. The heavy four-engine Airbus A340, normally configured for 400 seats and painted with airline livery, was unmarked and painted like a private jet. A search of the tail number disclosed that the owner was Prince Bandar bin Sultan, Saudi Arabia’s Ambassador to the U.S. The Saudi aviation presence in San Diego was part of the puzzle. Dallah Avco could easily provide the Boeings, simulators, instructors and all the required training needed to explain the hijacker’s flying proficiency. The remaining mystery was where the training took place. As I read through the 911 Commission’s report, I noticed that something had drawn all the hijackers out west on several occasions. The 911 Commission reported that each pilot/hijacker had made multiple trips to Las Vegas in the spring and summer of 2001; the commission had “no explanation” for this destination. But, logically, the vast Mojave and Sonoran Deserts would be the perfect training ground for practicing a high-to-low-altitude, coordinated attack. Initially, I focused on the many airline storage airports scattered throughout the southwestern deserts, where various airliners come and go without drawing much attention. Major airlines operate leased aircraft owned by investment banks. As an airline’s fleet requirements change, planes are routinely parked while new lease agreements are negotiated. The dry desert preserves the planes’ avionics and interiors while they sit, sometimes for years at a stretch. As I conducted a search throughout the deserts using Google Earth, one airport north of Tucson began to stick out. At the same time, from several old Iran-Contra sources I began hearing about a hush-hush airport used by the government contractor and mercenary outfit Blackwater, to train covert, special operations flight crews. I soon learned that major flight training had been conducted in the middle of the night with military and civilian airplanes in top-secret fashion. Blackwater is one of several operators that use the very airport I had run across — Pinal Airpark, a secluded desert facility near the town of Marana, Arizona, and near the former home of Saudi Arabian pilot Hani Hanjour, the hijacker pilot of American 77. I discovered that over 80 perfectly airworthy commercial airliners are scattered around the airport and heavily guarded by a mercenary army with covert Saudi ties. The opportunities are perfect to “borrow” a Boeing for unlimited and undocumented air training in the dedicated practice range over the desert. The means and the opportunity to slip hijackers in for training were all in place. Investigative author Jeremy Scahill had also discovered Pinal and written extensively about it in his 2007 book Blackwater: The Rise of the World’s Most Powerful Mercenary Army. He traced Pinal’s four-decade history of clandestine paramilitary activity, from Vietnam and the famous opium cargo outfit dubbed Air America to today’s government contracts in the “War on Terror,” such as the so-called Torture Taxi flights to U.S.-run detention facilities in Afghanistan. Scahill reports that these untraceable contracts govern operation of Blackwater’s fleet of Casa 212 cargo planes that frequent Pinal. He reports that Blackwater’s president Gary Jackson has been bold in bragging that Blackwater’s “black” contracts are so secret, he could not tell one federal agency about Blackwater’s work with another. “Air Blackwater,” previously known as Aviation Worldwide Services, formed in early 2001, just when the 911 hijackers were in the final stages of training. Public statements said they were to provide “military training operations and aviation transport” for the U.S. government. AWS was then acquired by Blackwater in 2003, as the Iraqi occupation was getting under way. Gary Jackson announced that the new aviation department “complements our strategic goal of providing a ‘one stop’ solution for all of our customer’s security and tactical training needs.” “Tactical training,” of course, raises a red flag. Evergreen International, an aviation company whose board includes the former head of the CIA’s air operations, has taken over management of Pinal while the government doles out no-bid, untraceable “black” contracts to Blackwater, Aero Contractors, International Air Response, Evergreen, SA Incorporated and a host of others.

Helen Caldicott Ive seen her speek twice. Total credibility, a great person with important things to say. COLBY IVE SEEN THOUSANDS OF HIS POSTS ....like Colby's second favorite group the FUGS SING ......all is nothing.

++++++++++++++++ NEED TO LOOK ELSEWHERE ON BRITISH SEX SCANDALS OH !! like the MSM !! (gee thanks !!) BBC accused of ‘cover-up’ as evidence from Savile inquiry is heavily censored Senior staff’s evidence into dropping of Newsnight abuse probe is blacked out http://www.standard....ed-8506191.html

============== OH !! BUT I WAITING FOR FBI HELPER 'friend ' to testify against the kook (useful idiot); Effect gun control debate ?? yup....yup.....

whatreallyhappened SITE WHO IS BEHIND THE BOSTOM MARATHON BOMBINGS? CIA 32% (526 votes) =============== MOSSAD 51% (835 votes) =============== SAUDI ARABIA 2% (31 votes) ================= WHITE, GUN-LOVING, GOVERNMENT HATING, PATRIOT SCUM 10% (165 votes) ================== IRAN/NORTH KOREA/ SYRIA/ ALL THEM GUYS WHO HATE OUR FREEDOMS 6% (93 votes) ================= Total votes: 1650

Analysis Finds Monsanto’s GM Corn Nutritionally Dead, Highly Toxic April 15, 2013 Mike Barrett, Natural Society Waking Times http://www.wakingtim...d-highly-toxic/

The Department of Defense has issued an instruction clarifying the rules for the involvement of military forces in civilian law enforcement. http://intellihub.com/2013/04/14/department-of-defense-issues-instructions-on-military-support-of-civilian-law-enforcement/ PublicIntelligence.net April 14, 2013 ....Though the Posse Comitatus Act is the primary restriction on direct DoD involvement in law enforcement functions, it does not prevent military personnel from participating in circumstances “authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress.” This includes circumstances involving “insurrection, domestic violence, or conspiracy that hinders the execution of State or Federal law” as well as actions “taken under express statutory authority.”

British Establishment Paedophile Cover-Up – The Ex-British Prime Minister, Edward Heath was a Paedophile. http://www.sovereign...s-a-paedophile/

France’s Media Admits that the Syrian “Opposition” is Al Qaida. Then Justifies French Government Support to the Terrorists By Gearóid Ó Colmáin Global Research, April 14, 2013 ============================================= In a report published on the 11th of April French daily Le Monde admits that rebels fighting the government of the Syrian Arab Republic are dominated by Japhat Al Nosra, a terrorist group linked to Al Qaida. The admission comes after two years of non-stop disinformation trumpeted from all French mainstream media outlets from the official right to the official left, disinformation that has attempted to convince the French public that democratic revolutionaries are fighting a war for human rights and freedom against a brutal, tyrannical dictator, who is ‘’ killing his own people’’. This puerile and deeply dishonest narrative has now been utterly discredited, as the facts about the terrorist nature of the Syrian rebels have become too obvious to ignore. In an article entitled ‘The New Visage of French Jihadism’ it is reported that French jihadists are leaving France in their hundreds to join the ‘holy war’ against the Syrian Arab Republic, with many more joining jihadist groups in Mali. On the same page in an article entitled ‘Al Qaida extends its territory and unites its forces in Iraq and Syria’, Le Monde’s Christophe Ayad reports: ‘The head of Iraq’s Islamic state, the Iraqi branch of Al Qaida, announced in a recorded message on April 9th, that his group would be fused with the Japhat AL Nosra( Support Front), the principal armed jihadist organization in Syria. The new group will be called Al-Qaida in Iraq and the Levant. This announcement comes two days after the call of Ayman Al-Zawarhiri, the successor of Osama Bin Laden in the leadership of Al-Qaida ‘headquarters,’ for the establishment of an Islamic state after the fall of the regime of Bachar-Al-Assad, afflicted since two years by an insurrection by the Sunni majority.’[1] So, here we now have the French establishment press, who has been working overtime since two years to convince us that those fighting Assad are democrats, admitting that they are in fact Al Qaida. According to an October 2010Fox News report, the above-mentioned Al Qaida leader Al-Zawarhiri dined at the Pentagon just months after 911. Fox News reporter Catherine Herridge claimed she had documents to prove this. Of course, Fox News being a corporate propaganda agency did not pursue this story any further, nor did any other international mainstream media outlets. In the war on terror ignorance is strength and questioning is stupid.[2] The Fox News reporter earns 900,000 dollars per annum.[3] In order to soften the blow and reassure French readers that the Quai d’Orsay’s support for the ‘rebels’ does not contradict France’s commitment to ‘human rights’, Le Monde’s Christophe Ayad tells us that: ‘Contrary to the Islamic State in Iraq the Al Nosra Front have made an effort not to systematically target civilians. It has not insisted, for the moment, on imposing an Islamic order that is too strict in the zones under its control, and has even concluded honorable agreements with the Kurdish rebellion, as in at Ras Al-Ain and more recently at Aleppo’[4] These rebels Le Monde attempts to whitewash have been systematically targeting civilians from the start of this conflict. They have put bombs in cars in busy market squares, they have bombed universities murdering and maiming hundreds of innocent civilians. They have been torturing and beheading civilians and soldiers alike [5], even forcing children to participate in the decapitation some of their victims. Children have also been used as soldiers.[6 ] They have forced women to wear the chador in the ‘liberated’ parts of once beautiful Aleppo.[7] They have desecrated and ruined the country’s religious and cultural heritage. They have blown up pipelines and wrecked infrastructure. They have destroyed thousands of schools, libraries and public service buildings. They have used chemical weapons. They have slit the throats of little children in order to blame the Syrian government. They terrorists are now even taking photos of themselves with the decapitated heads of their victims.[8] None of this is a secret. They have continously posted videos boasting about their crimes. Yet Le Monde wants us to believe that Japhat Al Nosra [image above] is a good, more civilized version of Al Qaida, one perhaps worthy of Western military support! Of course, Le Monde will reply that they do not support Japhat Al Nosra, that they support the secular rebels. But where are the secular rebels?Article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states very clearly that ‘any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law’. [9 ] The attempt by Western journalists to portray terrorist groups as freedom fighters and the use of information sources emanating exclusively from these groups to justify foreign aggression against a sovereign state recognized by the United Nations constitutes a war crime. The French ‘special envoy’ seems to lament the fact that the announcement of this new fusion of terrorist groups will discredit the French government’s attempts to convince its European Union partners to officially arm the ‘rebellion’. While the French press admits that the Syrian armed opposition is predominantly Al-Qaida, it continues to insinuate and suggest that the bulk of the armed opposition is in fact secular and liberal. However, no evidence to support such insinuations has ever been forthcoming, while evidence to the contrary is overwhelming and impossible to dismiss. In another article published on March 5th entitled ‘The Syrian Rebels take control of the Village of Raqqa in the North of the Country’, reporter Khalid Sid Mohand tells us just who these ‘rebels’ are. They are, he admits a few lines into his report: ‘A coalition of armed groups, some of whom are affiliated to the jihadists of Japhat-al-Nosra, who are behind the fall of Rakka.’[10] How lovely! Al Qaida have captured a Syrian town and the French liberal media seems to be very excited about the prospect of armed barbarians taking over the Levantine state. From the title of the article, one is led to believe that the Syrian rebels have taken the town, the Syrian rebels being the French media’s designated ‘Arab Spring’ good guys. So, even though the news is bad, the headline suggests that it is good. Reality is turned upside down. This technique of editorializing terrorists as rebels, while at the same time admitting that they are terrorists has the effect of confusing the public and preventing the uncritical reader from understanding the real forces at play in the Syrian conflict. The technique was repeatedly used during the Russian-Chechnian war when Islamist terrorists were repeatedly described as ‘rebels’. The double-standard, double-speak and double-think are techniques which are now part and parcel of ‘professional journalism’. While such villainous and schizophrenic behavior may appear to some as a diabolical conspiracy, the reality is far more complex. This schizoid way of thinking and speaking is simply the psychological reflection of a global economic system that is collapsing upon its own internal contradictions. The extraction of surplus value from labour and the globalization of this capitalist mode of production have made a tiny section of the global population extremely rich and powerful. The rich and powerful not only own the means of production, they also own the means of communication and as rule by a financial oligarchy is objectively contrary to democratic principles, a double-language and double-think is necessary in order to make people believe that 2 plus 2 equals 5. As a result, armed groups that serve the interests of the financial oligarchy will be mediatized as ‘freedom fighters’ and ‘human rights’ activists. However, as reporters cannot always control or ignore the complex realities they report on, the truth also emerges between the lines, in the margins and interstices of their own discourse. However, the job of rational analysis and interpretation of information is only being carried nowadays out by alternative media outlets whose goal is to serve the public good and tell the truth. Thus, articles reporting the ‘good news’ that the Syrian rebels have taking another town will also have to admit that these same rebels are actually Al Qaida. But because double-think is so deeply embedded in Western culture, the contradictions of these reports are rarely noticed or analyzed The task of molding the public mind to support the ‘cruel but necessary’ geopolitical strategies of the global financial elite falls to the mass media , who orient and distort information to suit imperial designs and the corporate interests of the media’s owners. In a Guardian article of 2002, the Western establishment’s policy of total hypocrisy was eloquently expressed by former British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s chief strategist Robert Cooper who wrote: ‘The challenge to the postmodern world is to get used to the idea of double standards. Among ourselves, we operate on the basis of laws and open cooperative security. But when dealing with more old-fashioned kinds of states outside the postmodern continent of Europe, we need to revert to the rougher methods of an earlier era – force, pre-emptive attack, deception, whatever is necessary to deal with those who still live in the nineteenth century world of every state for itself. Among ourselves, we keep the law but when we are operating in the jungle, we must also use the laws of the jungle’[11] Since unknown snipers opened fire on protestors and police in the town of Daraa on March 15th2011, the Syrian nation has been assaulted by death squads armed and trained by the Gulf emirates and Nato intelligence. The result has been the death of thousands and the destruction of a nation. This is a repeat of the Arc of Crisis created in Afghanistan in 1979 when US National Security Advisor Zbigniew Bzrezinski organized the arming and training of Mujahedeen terrorists in order to overthrow the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. The result was the creation of Al Qaida, a data-base of military-intelligence assets, who have since the very beginning, always served Nato geopolitical interests. The same technique is now being used against Syria. It is quite possible the French government’s admission that Al Qaida have taken over large parts of Syria could serve as an excuse in the weeks, months or years ahead for direct military intervention to ‘free’ Syria from Al-Qaida, just as French intelligence’s fomentation of jihadism in Libya and their transfer to Mali served the cause of military intervention there. Meanwhile,the media demonization of Bachar-Al Assad will continue. However, the existence of Al Qaida in Syria could eventually become the final justification for intervention if the terrorists succeed in sufficiently weakening the Syrian state and Russia can be persuaded to acquiesce in the loss of its Eastern Mediterranean client state. The dupes of Nato’s media empire can continue to comfort themselves that their governments are fighting terrorists in some countries, while helping ‘democratic rebels’ to fight ‘brutal regimes’ in others, but as savage austerity cuts and the militarization of urban space afflicts European cities, the reality that it is the degenerate Euro-Atlantic elites who are fomenting jihadist terrorism, the nightmarish reality that this is in fact both the ‘brutal regime’, and the opaque, loose ‘terrorist network’ which wants to take away our freedoms and destroy civilization, this reality will become impossible to ignore. For in truth the war on terrorism is ultimately a war on humanity. Notes [1] http://www.lemonde.f...57029_3210.html [2] http://www.foxnews.c...entagon-months/ [3] http://www.mediabist...ssed-out_b48807 [4] http://www.lemonde.f...57029_3210.html ‘Contrairement à l’Etat islamique en Irak, Le Front Al-Nosra prend garde à ne pascibler systématiquement les civils. Il a évité, pour l’instant, d’imposer un ordre islamique trop strict dans les zones passées sous son contrôle et conclut même des accords ponctuels avec la rébellion kurde, comme à Ras Al-Aïn, et plus récemment à Alep.’ [5] https://www.youtube....?v=4QhicJPzG9[4 [6] [7]http://www.globalres...-aleppo/5328510 [8]http://allainjules.c...mes-decapitees/ [9] http://www.ohchr.org...Pages/CCPR.aspx [10] http://www.lemonde.f...42837_3218.html [11] http://www.guardian....d/2002/apr/07/1