Film that includes clips from mainsteam media at the time, CBS etc.http://www.ncoic.com/clinton.htm ARKANSAS GOVERNOR BILL CLINTON PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH CIA DRUGS FOR GUNS CONNECTION By Paul DeRienzo An independent group of researchers in Arkansas are charging that Governor Bill Clinton is covering up an airport used by the CIA and major cocaine smugglers in a remote corner of the Ozark mountains. According to Deborah Robinson of In These Times, the Inter mountain Regional Airport in Mena,Arkansas continues to be the hub of operations for people like assassinated cocaine kingpin Barry Seal as well as government intelligence operations linked to arms and drug smuggling. In the 1980′s, the Mena airport became one of the world’s largest aircraft refurbishing centers, providing services to planes from many countries.Researchers claim that the largest consumers of aircraft refurbishing services are drug smugglers and intelligence agencies involved in covert activities.In fact, residents of Mena, Arkansas, have told reporters that former marine Lt. Colonel Oliver North was a frequent visitor during the 1980′s. Eugene Hasenfus, a pilot who was shot down in a Contra supply plane over Nicaragua in 1986, was also seen in town renting cargo vehicles. A federal Grand Jury looking into activities at the Mena airport refused to hand down any indictments after drug running charges were made public.Deborah Robinson says that Clinton had “ignored the situation” until he began his presidential campaign.” Clinton then said he would provide money for a state run investigation of the Mena airport. But according to Robinson, the promise of an investigation was never followed up by Clinton’s staff. In fact, a local Arkansas state prosecutor blasted Clinton’s promise of an investigation, comparing it to “spitting on a forest fire.”
Illustration by H.J. Ford for Andrew Lang’s The Strange Story Book, 1913. (Photo: Wikimedia Commons)
(INTELLIHUB) — Recently Daniel Bushell reporting for RT, did an amazing piece entitled White Minority of America, giving more insight to the general public of what really took place during the colonization process of America.
The report is based on a book, Lies My Teacher Told Me.
When I saw the piece I was amazed, it concluded everything I suspected to be a reality for years now. We have been lied to in school all along, as our history books truly are just a package of lies.
After watching it I felt truly disgusted that schools to this day continue to uphold the lie.
The book points out how at a great feast, much like Thanksgiving, the natives were poisoned by the colonists, in a “toast to eternal friendship”.
Some consider the American holocaust the worst case of genocide in American history. Over 100 million natives were reported to have been exterminated including men women and children. Some as young as 3-years old were spared as slaves.
This content was brought to you by Intellihub.com
“The Thanksgiving story is an absolution of the Pilgrims, whose brutal quest for absolute power in the New World is made to seem both religiously motivated and eminently human…. The Mayflower’s cultural heirs are programmed to find glory in their own depravity, and savagery in their most helpless victims, who can only redeem themselves by accepting the inherent goodness of white Americans.”
This article was originally published on November 27, 2003, when Glen Ford was co-publisher of The Black Commentator.
Nobody but Americans celebrates Thanksgiving. (Canadians have a holiday by the same name, but an entirely different history and political import.) It is reserved by history and the intent of “the founders” as the supremely white American holiday, the most ghoulish event on the national calendar. No Halloween of the imagination can rival the exterminationist reality that was the genesis, and remains the legacy, of the American Thanksgiving. It is the most loathsome, humanity-insulting day of the year – a pure glorification of racist barbarity.
We are thankful that the day grows nearer when the almost four centuries-old abomination will be deprived of its reason for being: white supremacy. Then we may all eat and drink in peace and gratitude for the blessings of humanity’s deliverance from the rule of evil men.
Thanksgiving is much more than a lie – if it were that simple, an historical correction of the record of events in 1600s Massachusetts would suffice to purge the “flaw” in the national mythology. But Thanksgiving is not just a twisted fable, and the mythology it nurtures is itself inherently evil. The real-life events – subsequently revised – were perfectly understood at the time as the first, definitive triumphs of the genocidal European project in New England. The near-erasure of Native Americans in Massachusetts and, soon thereafter, from most of the remainder of the northern English colonial seaboard was the true mission of the Pilgrim enterprise – Act One of the American Dream. African Slavery commenced contemporaneously – an overlapping and ultimately inseparable Act Two.
The last Act in the American drama must be the “root and branch” eradication of all vestiges of Act One and Two – America’s seminal crimes and formative projects. Thanksgiving as presently celebrated – that is, as a national politicalevent – is an affront to civilization.
Celebrating the unspeakable
White America embraced Thanksgiving because a majority of that population glories in the fruits, if not the unpleasant details, of genocide and slavery and feels, on the whole, good about their heritage: a cornucopia of privilege and national power. Children are taught to identify with the good fortune of the Pilgrims. It does not much matter that the Native American and African holocausts that flowed from the feast at Plymouth are hidden from the children’s version of the story – kids learn soon enough that Indians were made scarce and Africans became enslaved. But they will also never forget the core message of the holiday: that the Pilgrims were good people, who could not have purposely set such evil in motion. Just as the first Thanksgivings marked the consolidation of the English toehold in what became the United States, the core ideological content of the holiday serves to validate all that has since occurred on these shores – a national consecration of the unspeakable, a balm and benediction for the victors, a blessing of the fruits of murder and kidnapping, and an implicit obligation to continue the seamless historical project in the present day.
The Thanksgiving story is an absolution of the Pilgrims, whose brutal quest for absolute power in the New World is made to seem both religiously motivated and eminently human. Most importantly, the Pilgrims are depicted as victims – of harsh weather and their own naïve yet wholesome visions of a new beginning. In light of this carefully nurtured fable, whatever happened to the Indians, from Plymouth to California and beyond, in the aftermath of the 1621 dinner must be considered a mistake, the result of misunderstandings – at worst, a series of lamentable tragedies. The story provides the essential first frame of the American saga. It is unalloyed racist propaganda, a tale that endures because it served the purposes of a succession of the Pilgrims’ political heirs, in much the same way that Nazi-enhanced mythology of a glorious Aryan/German past advanced another murderous, expansionist mission.
Thanksgiving is quite dangerous – as were the Pilgrims.
Rejoicing in a cemetery
The English settlers, their ostensibly religious venture backed by a trading company, were glad to discover that they had landed in a virtual cemetery in 1620. Corn still sprouted in the abandoned fields of the Wampanoags , but only a remnant of the local population remained around the fabled Rock. In a letter to England, Massachusetts Bay colony founder John Winthrop wrote, “But for the natives in these parts, God hath so pursued them, as for 300 miles space the greatest part of them are swept away by smallpox which still continues among them. So as God hath thereby cleared our title to this place, those who remain in these parts, being in all not 50, have put themselves under our protection.”
Ever diligent to claim their own advantages as God’s will, the Pilgrims thanked their deity for having “pursued” the Indians to mass death. However, it was not divine intervention that wiped out most of the natives around the village of Patuxet but, most likely, smallpox-embedded blankets planted during an English visit or slave raid. Six years before the Pilgrim landing, a ship sailed into Patuxet’s harbor, captained by none other than the famous seaman and mercenary soldierJohn Smith , former leader of the first successful English colony in the New World, at Jamestown, Virginia. Epidemic and slavery followed in his wake, as Debra Glidden described in IMDiversity.com :
In 1614 the Plymouth Company of England, a joint stock company, hired Captain John Smith to explore land in its behalf. Along what is now the coast of Massachusetts in the territory of the Wampanoag, Smith visited the town of Patuxet according to “The Colonial Horizon,” a 1969 book edited by William Goetzinan. Smith renamed the town Plymouth in honor of his employers, but the Wampanoag who inhabited the town continued to call it Patuxet.
The following year Captain Hunt, an English slave trader, arrived at Patuxet. It was common practice for explorers to capture Indians, take them to Europe and sell them into slavery for 220 shillings apiece. That practice was described in a 1622 account of happenings entitled “A Declaration of the State of the Colony and Affairs in Virginia,” written by Edward Waterhouse. True to the explorer tradition, Hunt kidnapped a number of Wampanoags to sell into slavery.
Another common practice among European explorers was to give “smallpox blankets” to the Indians. Since smallpox was unknown on this continent prior to the arrival of the Europeans, Native Americans did not have any natural immunity to the disease so smallpox would effectively wipe out entire villages with very little effort required by the Europeans. William Fenton describes how Europeans decimated Native American villages in his 1957 work “American Indian and White relations to 1830.” From 1615 to 1619 smallpox ran rampant among the Wampanoags and their neighbors to the north. The Wampanoag lost 70 percent of their population to the epidemic and the Massachusetts lost 90 percent.
Most of the Wampanoag had died from the smallpox epidemic so when the Pilgrims arrived they found well-cleared fields which they claimed for their own. A Puritan colonist, quoted by Harvard University’s Perry Miller, praised the plague that had wiped out the Indians for it was “the wonderful preparation of the Lord Jesus Christ, by his providence for his people’s abode in the Western world.” Historians have since speculated endlessly on why the woods in the region resembled a park to the disembarking Pilgrims in 1620. The reason should have been obvious: hundreds, if not thousands, of people had lived there just five years before.
In less than three generations the settlers would turn all of New England into a charnel house for Native Americans, and fire the economic engines of slavery throughout English-speaking America. Plymouth Rock is the place where the nightmare truly began.
It is not at all clear what happened at the first – and only – “integrated” Thanksgiving feast. Only two written accounts of the three-day event exist, and one of them, by Governor William Bradford, was written 20 years after the fact. Was Chief Massasoit invited to bring 90 Indians with him to dine with 52 colonists, most of them women and children? This seems unlikely. A good harvest had provided the settlers with plenty of food, according to their accounts, so the whites didn’t really need the Wampanoag’s offering of five deer. What we do know is that there had been lots of tension between the two groups that fall. John Two-Hawks, who runs the Native Circle  web site, gives a sketch of the facts:
“Thanksgiving’ did not begin as a great loving relationship between the pilgrims and the Wampanoag, Pequot and Narragansett people. In fact, in October of 1621 when the pilgrim survivors of their first winter in Turtle Island sat down to share the first unofficial ‘Thanksgiving’ meal, the Indians who were there were not even invited! There was no turkey, squash, cranberry sauce or pumpkin pie. A few days before this alleged feast took place, a company of ‘pilgrims’ led by Miles Standish actively sought the head of a local Indian chief, and an 11 foot high wall was erected around the entire Plymouth settlement for the very purpose of keeping Indians out!”
It is much more likely that Chief Massasoit either crashed the party, or brought enough men to ensure that he was not kidnapped or harmed by the Pilgrims. Dr. Tingba Apidta, in his “Black Folks’ Guide to Understanding Thanksgiving ,” surmises that the settlers “brandished their weaponry” early and got drunk soon thereafter. He notes that “each Pilgrim drank at least a half gallon of beer a day, which they preferred even to water. This daily inebriation led their governor, William Bradford, to comment on his people’s ‘notorious sin,’ which included their ‘drunkenness and uncleanliness’ and rampant ‘sodomy.’”
Soon after the feast the brutish Miles Standish “got his bloody prize,” Dr. Apidta writes:
“He went to the Indians, pretended to be a trader, then beheaded an Indian man named Wituwamat. He brought the head to Plymouth, where it was displayed on a wooden spike for many years, according to Gary B. Nash, ‘as a symbol of white power.’ Standish had the Indian man’s young brother hanged from the rafters for good measure. From that time on, the whites were known to the Indians of Massachusetts by the name ‘Wotowquenange,’ which in their tongue meant cutthroats and stabbers.”
What is certain is that the first feast was not called a “Thanksgiving” at the time; no further integrated dining occasions were scheduled; and the first, official all-Pilgrim “Thanksgiving” had to wait until 1637, when the whites of New England celebrated the massacre of the Wampanoag’s southern neighbors, the Pequots.
The real Thanksgiving Day Massacre
The Pequots today own the Foxwood Casino and Hotel , in Ledyard, Connecticut, with gross gaming revenues of over $9 billion in 2000. This is truly a (very belated) miracle, since the real first Pilgrim Thanksgiving was intended as the Pequot’s epitaph. Sixteen years after the problematical Plymouth feast, the English tried mightily to erase the Pequots from the face of the Earth, and thanked God for the blessing.
Having subdued, intimidated or made mercenaries of most of the tribes of Massachusetts, the English turned their growing force southward, toward the rich Connecticut valley, the Pequot’s sphere of influence. At the point where the Mystic River meets the sea, the combined force of English and allied Indians bypassed the Pequot fort to attack and set ablaze a town full of women, children and old people.
William Bradford, the former Governor of Plymouth and one of the chroniclers of the 1621 feast, was also on hand for the great massacre of 1637:
“Those that escaped the fire were slain with the sword; some hewed to pieces, others run through with their rapiers, so that they were quickly dispatched and very few escaped. It was conceived they thus destroyed about 400 at this time. It was a fearful sight to see them thus frying in the fire…horrible was the stink and scent thereof, but the victory seemed a sweet sacrifice, and they gave the prayers thereof to God, who had wrought so wonderfully for them, thus to enclose their enemies in their hands, and give them so speedy a victory over so proud and insulting an enemy.”
The rest of the white folks thought so, too. “This day forth shall be a day of celebration and thanksgiving for subduing the Pequots,” read Governor John Winthrop’s proclamation. The authentic Thanksgiving Day was born.
Most historians believe about 700 Pequots were slaughtered at Mystic. Many prisoners were executed, and surviving women and children sold into slavery in the West Indies. Pequot prisoners that escaped execution were parceled out to Indian tribes allied with the English. The Pequot were thought to have been extinguished as a people. According to IndyMedia , “The Pequot tribe numbered 8,000 when the Pilgrims arrived, but disease had brought their numbers down to 1,500 by 1637. The Pequot ‘War’ killed all but a handful of remaining members of the tribe.”
But there were still too many Indians around to suit the whites of New England, who bided their time while their own numbers increased to critical, murderous mass.
Guest’s head on a pole
By the 1670s the colonists, with 8,000 men under arms, felt strong enough to demand that the Pilgrims’ former dinner guests the Wampanoags disarm and submit to the authority of the Crown. After a series of settler provocations in 1675, the Wampanoag struck back, under the leadership of Chief Metacomet, son of Massasoit, called King Philip by the English. Metacomet/Philip, whose wife and son were captured and sold into West Indian slavery, wiped out 13 settlements and killed 600 adult white men before the tide of battle turned. A1996 issue  of the Revolutionary Worker provides an excellent narrative.
In their victory, the settlers launched an all-out genocide against the remaining Native people. The Massachusetts government offered 20 shillings bounty for every Indian scalp, and 40 shillings for every prisoner who could be sold into slavery. Soldiers were allowed to enslave any Indian woman or child under 14 they could capture. The “Praying Indians” who had converted to Christianity and fought on the side of the European troops were accused of shooting into the treetops during battles with “hostiles.” They were enslaved or killed. Other “peaceful” Indians of Dartmouth and Dover were invited to negotiate or seek refuge at trading posts – and were sold onto slave ships.
It is not known how many Indians were sold into slavery, but in this campaign,500 enslaved Indians were shipped from Plymouth alone. Of the 12,000 Indians in the surrounding tribes, probably about half died from battle, massacre and starvation.
After King Philip’s War, there were almost no Indians left free in the northern British colonies. A colonist wrote from Manhattan’s New York colony: “There is now but few Indians upon the island and those few no ways hurtful. It is to be admired how strangely they have decreased by the hand of God, since the English first settled in these parts.” In Massachusetts, the colonists declared a “day of public thanksgiving” in 1676, saying, “there now scarce remains a name or family of them [the Indians] but are either slain, captivated or fled.”
Fifty-five years after the original Thanksgiving Day, the Puritans had destroyed the generous Wampanoag and all other neighboring tribes. The Wampanoag chief King Philip was beheaded. His head was stuck on a pole in Plymouth, where the skull still hung on display 24 years later.
This is not thought to be a fit Thanksgiving tale for the children of today, but it’s the real story, well-known to the settler children of New England at the time – the white kids who saw the Wampanoag head on the pole year after year and knew for certain that God loved them best of all, and that every atrocity they might ever commit against a heathen, non-white was blessed.
There’s a good term for the process thus set in motion: nation-building.
Roots of the slave trade
The British North American colonists’ practice of enslaving Indians for labor or direct sale to the West Indies preceded the appearance of the first chained Africans at the dock in Jamestown, Virginia, in 1619. The Jamestown colonists’ human transaction with the Dutch vessel was an unscheduled occurrence. However, once the African slave trade became commercially established, the fates of Indians and Africans in the colonies became inextricably entwined. New England, born of up-close-and-personal, burn-them-in-the-fires-of-hell genocide, led the political and commercial development of the English colonies. The region also led the nascent nation’s descent into a slavery-based society and economy.
Ironically, an apologist for Virginian slavery made one of the best, early cases for the indictment of New England as the engine of the American slave trade. Unreconstructed secessionist Lewis Dabney’s 1867 book “A Defense of Virginia” traced the slave trade’s origins all the way back to Plymouth Rock:
“The planting of the commercial States of North America began with the colony of Puritan Independents at Plymouth, in 1620, which was subsequently enlarged into the State of Massachusetts. The other trading colonies, Rhode Island and Connecticut, as well as New Hampshire (which never had an extensive shipping interest), were offshoots of Massachusetts. They partook of the same characteristics and pursuits; and hence, the example of the parent colony is taken here as a fair representation of them.
“The first ship from America, which embarked in the African slave trade, was theDesire, Captain Pierce, of Salem; and this was among the first vessels ever built in the colony. The promptitude with which the “Puritan Fathers” embarked in this business may be comprehended, when it is stated that the Desire sailed upon her voyage in June, 1637. [Note: the year they massacred the Pequots.] The first feeble and dubious foothold was gained by the white man at Plymouth less than seventeen years before; and as is well known, many years were expended by the struggle of the handful of settlers for existence. So that it may be correctly said, that the commerce of New England was born of the slave trade; as its subsequent prosperity was largely founded upon it. The Desire, proceeding to the Bahamas, with a cargo of ‘dry fish and strong liquors, the only commodities for those parts,’ obtained the negroes from two British men-of-war, which had captured them from a Spanish slaver.
“Thus, the trade of which the good ship Desire, of Salem, was the harbinger, grew into grand proportions; and for nearly two centuries poured a flood of wealth into New England, as well as no inconsiderable number of slaves. Meanwhile, the other maritime colonies of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, and Connecticut, followed the example of their elder sister emulously; and their commercial history is but a repetition of that of Massachusetts. The towns of Providence, Newport, and New Haven became famous slave trading ports. The magnificent harbor of the second, especially, was the favorite starting-place of the slave ships; and its commerce rivaled, or even exceeded, that of the present commercial metropolis, New York. All the four original States, of course, became slaveholding.”
The Revolution that exploded in 1770s New England was undertaken by men thoroughly imbued with the worldview of the Indian-killer and slave-holder. How could they not be? The “country” they claimed as their own was fathered by genocide and mothered by slavery – its true distinction among the commercial nations of the world. And these men were not ashamed, but proud, with vast ambition to spread their exceptional characteristics West and South and wherever their so-far successful project in nation-building might take them – and by the same bloody, savage methods that had served them so well in the past.
At the moment of deepest national crisis following the battle of Gettysburg in 1863, President Abraham Lincoln invoked the national fable that is far more central to the white American personality than Lincoln’s battlefield “Address.” Lincoln seized upon the 1621 feast as the historic “Thanksgiving” – bypassing the official and authentic 1637 precedent – and assigned the dateless, murky event the fourth Thursday in November. Lincoln surveyed a broken nation, and attempted nation-rebuilding, based on the purest white myth. The same year that he issued the Emancipation Proclamation, he renewed the national commitment to a white manifest destiny that began at Plymouth Rock. Lincoln sought to rekindle a shared national mission that former Confederates and Unionists and white immigrants from Europe could collectively embrace. It was and remains a barbaric and racist national unifier, by definition. Only the most fantastic lies can sanitize the history of the Plymouth Colony of Massachusetts.
“Like a rock”
The Thanksgiving holiday fable is at once a window on the way that many, if not most, white Americans view the world and their place in it, and a pollutant that leaches barbarism into the modern era. The fable attempts to glorify the indefensible, to enshrine an era and mission that represent the nation’s lowest moral denominators. Thanksgiving as framed in the mythology is, consequently, a drag on that which is potentially civilizing in the national character, a crippling, atavistic deformity. Defenders of the holiday will claim that the politically-corrected children’s version promotes brotherhood, but that is an impossibility – a bald excuse to prolong the worship of colonial “forefathers” and to erase the crimes they committed. Those bastards burned the Pequot women and children, and ushered in the multinational business of slavery. These are facts. The myth is an insidious diversion – and worse.
Humanity cannot tolerate a 21st Century superpower, much of whose population perceives the world through the eyes of 17th Century land and flesh bandits. Yet that is the trick that fate has played on the globe. We described the roots of the planetary dilemma in our March 13 commentary, “Racism & War, Perfect Together. ”
The English arrived with criminal intent – and brought wives and children to form new societies predicated on successful plunder. To justify the murderous enterprise, Indians who had initially cooperated with the squatters were transmogrified into “savages” deserving displacement and death. The relentlessly refreshed lie of Indian savagery became a truth in the minds of white Americans, a fact to be acted upon by every succeeding generation of whites. The settlers became a singular people confronting the great “frontier” – a euphemism for centuries of genocidal campaigns against a darker, “savage” people marked for extinction.
The necessity of genocide was the operative, working assumption of the expanding American nation. “Manifest Destiny” was born at Plymouth Rock and Jamestown, later to fall (to paraphrase Malcolm) like a rock on Mexico, the Philippines, Haiti, Nicaragua, etc. Little children were taught that the American project was inherently good, Godly, and that those who got in the way were “evil-doers” or just plain subhuman, to be gloriously eliminated. The lie is central to white American identity, embraced by waves of European settlers who never saw a red person.
Only a century ago, American soldiers caused the deaths of possibly a million Filipinos whom they had been sent to “liberate” from Spanish rule. They didn’t even know who they were killing, and so rationalized their behavior by substituting the usual American victims. Colonel Funston , of the Twentieth Kansas Volunteers, explained what got him motivated in the Philippines:
“Our fighting blood was up and we all wanted to kill ‘niggers.’ This shooting human beings is a ‘hot game,’ and beats rabbit hunting all to pieces.” Another wrote that “the boys go for the enemy as if they were chasing jack-rabbits …. I, for one, hope that Uncle Sam will apply the chastening rod, good, hard, and plenty, and lay it on until they come into the reservation and promise to be good ‘Injuns.’”
Last week in northern Iraq another American colonel, Joe Anderson of the 101st Airborne (Assault) Division, revealed that he is incapable of perceiving Arabs as human beings. Colonel Anderson, who doubles as a commander and host of a radio call-in program and a TV show designed to win the hearts and minds of the people of Mosul, had learned that someone was out to assassinate him. In the wild mood swing common to racists, Anderson decided that Iraqis are all alike – and of a different breed. He said as much to the Los Angeles Times .
“They don’t understand being nice,” said Anderson, who helps oversee the military zone that includes Mosul and environs. He doesn’t hide his irritation after months dedicated to restoring the city: “We spent so long here working with kid gloves, but the average Iraqi guy will tell you, ‘The only thing people respect here is violence…. They only understand being shot at, being killed. That’s the culture.’ … Nice guys do finish last here.”
Col. Anderson personifies the unfitness of Americans to play a major role in the world, much less rule it. “We poured a lot of our heart and soul into trying to help the people,” he bitched, as if Americans were God’s gift to the planet. “But it can be frustrating when you hear stupid people still saying, ‘You’re occupiers. You want our oil. You’re turning our country over to Israel.’” He cannot fathom that other people – non-whites – aspire to run their own affairs, and will kill and die to achieve that basic right.
What does this have to do with the Mayflower? Everything. Although possibly against their wishes, the Pilgrims hosted the Wampanoag for three no doubt anxious days. The same men killed and enslaved Wampanoags immediately before and after the feast. They, their newly arrived English comrades and their children roasted hundreds of neighboring Indians alive just 16 years later, and two generations afterwards cleared nearly the whole of New England of its indigenous “savages,” while enthusiastically enriching themselves through the invention of transoceanic, sophisticated means of enslaving millions. The Mayflower’s cultural heirs are programmed to find glory in their own depravity, and savagery in their most helpless victims, who can only redeem themselves by accepting the inherent goodness of white Americans.
Thanksgiving encourages these cognitive cripples in their madness, just as it is designed to do.
• Secret deal places no legal limits on use of data by Israelis
• Only official US government communications protected
• Agency insists it complies with rules governing privacy
• Read the NSA and Israel’s ‘memorandum of understanding’
The National Security Agency routinely shares raw intelligence data withIsrael without first sifting it to remove information about US citizens, a top-secret document provided to the Guardian by whistleblower Edward Snowden reveals.
Details of the intelligence-sharing agreement are laid out in a memorandum of understanding between the NSA and its Israeli counterpart that shows the US government handed over intercepted communications likely to contain phone calls and emails of American citizens. The agreement places no legally binding limits on the use of the data by the Israelis.
The disclosure that the NSA agreed to provide raw intelligence data to a foreign country contrasts with assurances from the Obama administrationthat there are rigorous safeguards to protect the privacy of US citizens caught in the dragnet. The intelligence community calls this process “minimization”, but the memorandum makes clear that the information shared with the Israelis would be in its pre-minimized state.
The deal was reached in principle in March 2009, according to the undated memorandum, which lays out the ground rules for the intelligence sharing.
The five-page memorandum, termed an agreement between the US and Israeli intelligence agencies “pertaining to the protection of US persons”, repeatedly stresses the constitutional rights of Americans to privacy and the need for Israeli intelligence staff to respect these rights.
But this is undermined by the disclosure that Israel is allowed to receive “raw Sigint” – signal intelligence. The memorandum says: “Raw Sigint includes, but is not limited to, unevaluated and unminimized transcripts, gists, facsimiles, telex, voice and Digital Network Intelligence metadataand content.”
According to the agreement, the intelligence being shared would not be filtered in advance by NSA analysts to remove US communications. “NSA routinely sends ISNU [the Israeli Sigint National Unit] minimized and unminimized raw collection”, it says.
Although the memorandum is explicit in saying the material had to be handled in accordance with US law, and that the Israelis agreed not to deliberately target Americans identified in the data, these rules are not backed up by legal obligations.
“This agreement is not intended to create any legally enforceable rights and shall not be construed to be either an international agreement or a legally binding instrument according to international law,” the document says.
In a statement to the Guardian, an NSA spokesperson did not deny that personal data about Americans was included in raw intelligence data shared with the Israelis. But the agency insisted that the shared intelligence complied with all rules governing privacy.
“Any US person information that is acquired as a result of NSA’ssurveillance activities is handled under procedures that are designed to protect privacy rights,” the spokesperson said.
The NSA declined to answer specific questions about the agreement, including whether permission had been sought from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance (Fisa) court for handing over such material.
The memorandum of understanding, which the Guardian is publishing in full, allows Israel to retain “any files containing the identities of US persons” for up to a year. The agreement requests only that the Israelis should consult the NSA’s special liaison adviser when such data is found.
Notably, a much stricter rule was set for US government communications found in the raw intelligence. The Israelis were required to “destroy upon recognition” any communication “that is either to or from an official of the US government”. Such communications included those of “officials of the executive branch (including the White House, cabinet departments, and independent agencies), the US House of Representatives and Senate (member and staff) and the US federal court system (including, but not limited to, the supreme court)”.
It is not clear whether any communications involving members of US Congress or the federal courts have been included in the raw data provided by the NSA, nor is it clear how or why the NSA would be in possession of such communications. In 2009, however, the New York Times reported on “the agency’s attempt to wiretap a member of Congress, without court approval, on an overseas trip”.
The NSA is required by law to target only non-US persons without an individual warrant, but it can collect the content and metadata of Americans’ emails and calls without a warrant when such communication is with a foreign target. US persons are defined in surveillance legislation as US citizens, permanent residents and anyone located on US soil at the time of the interception, unless it has been positively established that they are not a citizen or permanent resident.
Moreover, with much of the world’s internet traffic passing through US networks, large numbers of purely domestic communications also get scooped up incidentally by the agency’s surveillance programs.
The document mentions only one check carried out by the NSA on the raw intelligence, saying the agency will “regularly review a sample of files transferred to ISNU to validate the absence of US persons’ identities”. It also requests that the Israelis limit access only to personnel with a “strict need to know”.
Israeli intelligence is allowed “to disseminate foreign intelligence information concerning US persons derived from raw Sigint by NSA” on condition that it does so “in a manner that does not identify the US person”. The agreement also allows Israel to release US person identities to “outside parties, including all INSU customers” with the NSA’s written permission.
Although Israel is one of America’s closest allies, it is not one of the inner core of countries involved in surveillance sharing with the US – Britain, Australia, Canada and New Zealand. This group is collectively known as Five Eyes.
The relationship between the US and Israel has been strained at times, both diplomatically and in terms of intelligence. In the top-secret 2013 intelligence community budget request, details of which were disclosed by the Washington Post, Israel is identified alongside Iran and China as a target for US cyberattacks.
While NSA documents tout the mutually beneficial relationship of Sigint sharing, another report, marked top secret and dated September 2007, states that the relationship, while central to US strategy, has become overwhelmingly one-sided in favor of Israel.
“Balancing the Sigint exchange equally between US and Israeli needs has been a constant challenge,” states the report, titled ‘History of the US – Israel Sigint Relationship, Post-1992’. “In the last decade, it arguably tilted heavily in favor of Israeli security concerns. 9/11 came, and went, with NSA’s only true Third Party [counter-terrorism] relationship being driven almost totally by the needs of the partner.”
In another top-secret document seen by the Guardian, dated 2008, a senior NSA official points out that Israel aggressively spies on the US. “On the one hand, the Israelis are extraordinarily good Sigint partners for us, but on the other, they target us to learn our positions on Middle East problems,” the official says. “A NIE [National Intelligence Estimate] ranked them as the third most aggressive intelligence service against the US.”
Later in the document, the official is quoted as saying: “One of NSA’s biggest threats is actually from friendly intelligence services, like Israel. There are parameters on what NSA shares with them, but the exchange is so robust, we sometimes share more than we intended.”
The memorandum of understanding also contains hints that there had been tensions in the intelligence-sharing relationship with Israel. At a meeting in March 2009 between the two agencies, according to the document, it was agreed that the sharing of raw data required a new framework and further training for Israeli personnel to protect US personinformation.
It is not clear whether or not this was because there had been problems up to that point in the handling of intelligence that was found to contain Americans’ data.
However, an earlier US document obtained by Snowden, which discusses co-operating on a military intelligence program, bluntly lists under the cons: “Trust issues which revolve around previous ISR [Israel] operations.”
The Guardian asked the Obama administration how many times US data had been found in the raw intelligence, either by the Israelis or when theNSA reviewed a sample of the files, but officials declined to provide this information. Nor would they disclose how many other countries the NSA shared raw data with, or whether the Fisa court, which is meant to oversee NSA surveillance programs and the procedures to handle US information, had signed off the agreement with Israel.
In its statement, the NSA said: “We are not going to comment on any specific information sharing arrangements, or the authority under which any such information is collected. The fact that intelligence services work together under specific and regulated conditions mutually strengthens the security of both nations.
“NSA cannot, however, use these relationships to circumvent US legal restrictions. Whenever we share intelligence information, we comply with all applicable rules, including the rules to protect US person information.”
Published by MrMnmn911 on Feb 1, 2013
Was JFK’s comment on “secret societies” a statement against the “NWO”? I searched this famous quote and finally found the full unedited written transcript and audio of this speech.
http://www.jfklibrary.org/Asset-Viewe…Illuminati: Origins of Secret Government
by Paul Craig Roberts
July 25, 2013
Fairy Tales Are Dangerous
“In a real world in which you and I must live
fairy tales are dangerous
dangerous because they are untrue
anything which is untrue is dangerous
and it is all the more dangerous when the fairy tale is accepted as reality
simply because it has an official seal of approval
or because ‘honorable’ men announce you must believe it
or because powerful elements of the press tell you the fairy tale is true”
Garrison’s words from 1967 are just as true today as they were then. They were a warning that went unheeded by most and getting by with the JFK assassination coup, the same criminal cabal, emboldened in their success, went on to continuously deceive the world with ever more deadly fairy tales.
Did Garrison get everything right in his investigation of the JFK assassination? Probably not. Were some things like the possible Israel/Mossad connection left out, not because of him covering up some aspects but perhaps because he just didn’t have the information? Most likely. Was he at least on the right track? Definitely.
The below video is amazing in the fact that after NBC had done a hit piece on Garrison, he petitioned the FCC who agreed that the program was biased and granted Garrison a 30-minute rebuttal. That would never happen today.
While watching Garrison’s response I couldn’t help but mentally substitute elements of 9/11 for JFK in his narrative. The two events are similar in so many ways. Both were a massive psyop, false flag coverups with devastating aftermaths including millions of deaths for the profit of a few.
History is littered with dangerous fairy tales and collectively we still are yet to learn how to keep them from repeating.
The video was found at 50 Years Since JFK Assassination Retrospective.
THE ACT OF 1871
1871, February 21: Congress Passes an Act to Provide a Government for
the District of Columbia, also known as the Act of 1871.
With no constitutional authority to do so, Congress creates a separate form of
government for the District of Columbia, a ten mile square parcel of land (see,
Acts of the Forty-first Congress,” Section 34, Session III, chapters 61 and 62).
The act — passed when the country was weakened and financially depleted in
the aftermath of the Civil War — was a strategic move by foreign interests
(international bankers) who were intent upon gaining a stranglehold on the
coffers and neck of America. Congress cut a deal with the international bankers
(specifically Rothschilds of London) to incur a DEBT to said bankers. Because
the bankers were not about to lend money to a floundering nation without
serious stipulations, they devised a way to get their foot in the door of the
The Act of 1871 formed a corporation called THE UNITED STATES. The
corporation, OWNED by foreign interests, moved in and shoved the original
Constitution into a dustbin. With the Act of 1871, the organic Constitution was
defaced — in effect vandalized and sabotage — when the title was capitalized
and the word “for” was changed to “of” in the title.
THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA is the constitution of
the incorporated UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. It operates in an economic
capacity and has been used to fool the People into thinking it governs the
Republic. It does is not! Capitalization is NOT insignificant when one is referring
to a legal document. This seemingly “minor” alteration has had a major impact
on every subsequent generation of Americans. What Congress did by passing
the Act of 1871 was create an entirely new document, a constitution for the
government of the District of Columbia, an INCORPORATED government. This
newly altered Constitution was not intended to benefit the Republic. It benefits
only the corporation of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and operates entirely
outside the original (organic) Constitution.
Instead of having absolute and unalienable rights guaranteed under the organic
Constitution, we the people now have “relative” rights or privileges. One
example is the Sovereign’s right to travel, which has now been transformed
(under corporate government policy) into a “privilege” that requires citizens to
be licensed. (Passports) By passing the Act of 1871, Congress committed
TREASON against the People who were Sovereign under the grants and decrees
of the Declaration of Independence and the organic Constitution. [Information
courtesy of Lisa Guliani, www.babelmagazine.com. The Act of 1871 became the
FOUNDATION of all the treason since committed by government officials.]
Dove: The following is an expansion and further explanation of the above (an
adaptation of Lisa’s work, done with her permission), which you may want to
read for your own edification. Whereas my Chapter 9 is a time-map of the major
Headlines and Landmines of the 200-years-plus history of America, each
subsequent chapter goes into particular details. This section is from Chapter 18,
“The Tale of Two Governments, which overall addresses the difference between
a democracy and a republic as well as the fact of a federal government and a
shadow government practicing under the guise of The Corporation. I’m sure Lisa
won’t mind your using what you need in order to make whatever point you wish
to make in the moment. . . . .
The United States Isn’t a Country; It’s a Corporation! In preparation for stealing
America, the puppets of Britain’s banking cabal had already created a second
government, a Shadow Government designed to manage what the common
herd believed was a democracy, but what really was an incorporated UNITED
STATES. Together this chimera, this two-headed monster, disallowed the
common herd all rights of sui juris. [you, in your sovereignty]
Congress, with no authority to do so, created a separate form of government for
the District of Columbia, a ten-mile square parcel of land. WHY and HOW did
they do so? First, Lisa Guliani of Babel Magazine, reminds us that the Civil War
was, in fact, “little more than a calculated front with fancy footwork by
backroom players.” Then she adds: “It was also a strategic maneuver by British
and European interests (international bankers) intent on gaining a stranglehold
on the coffers of America. And, because Congress knew our country was in dire
financial straits, certain members of Congress cut a deal with the international
bankers (in those days, the Rothschilds of London were dipping their fingers into
everyone’s pie). . . . . There you have the WHY, why members of Congress
permitted the international bankers to gain further control of America. . . . . .
“Then, by passing the Act of 1871, Congress formed a corporation known as
THE UNITED STATES. This corporation, owned by foreign interests, shoved the
organic version of the Constitution aside by changing the word ‘for’ to ‘of’ in the
title. Let me explain: the original Constitution drafted by the Founding Fathers
read: ‘The Constitution for the united states of America.’ [note that neither the
words ‘united’ nor ‘states’ began with capital letters] But the CONSTITUTION OF
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA’ is a corporate constitution, which is
absolutely NOT the same document you think it is. First of all, it ended all our
rights of sovereignty [sui juris]. So you now have the HOW, how the
international bankers got their hands on THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.”
To fully understand how our rights of sovereignty were ended, you must know
the full meaning of sovereign: “Chief or highest, supreme power, superior in
position to all others; independent of and unlimited by others; possessing or
entitled to; original and independent authority or jurisdiction.” (Webster).
In short, our government, which was created by and for us as sovereigns — free
citizens deemed to have the highest authority in the land – was stolen from us,
along with our rights. Keep in mind that, according to the original Constitution,
only We the People are sovereign. Government is not sovereign. The Declaration
of Independence say, “…government is subject to the consent of the governed.”
That’s us — the sovereigns. When did you last feet like a sovereign? As Lisa
“It doesn’t take a rocket scientist or a constitutional historian to figure out that
the U.S. Government has NOT been subject to the consent of the governed
since long before you or I were born. Rather, the governed are subject to the
whim and greed of the corporation, which has stretched its tentacles beyond the
ten-mile-square parcel of land known as the District of Columbia. In fact, it has
invaded every state of the Republic. Mind you, the corporation has NO
jurisdiction beyond the District of Columbia. You just think it does. “You see,
you are ‘presumed’ to know the law, which is very weird since We the People
are taught NOTHING about the law in school. We memorize obscure facts and
phrases here and there, like the Preamble, which says, ‘We the
People…establish this Constitution for the United States of America.’ But our
teachers only gloss over the Bill of Rights. Our schools (controlled by the
corporate government) don’t delve into the Constitution at depth. After all, the
corporation was established to indoctrinate and ‘dumb-down’ the masses, not to
teach anything of value or importance. Certainly, no one mentioned that
America was sold-out to foreign interests, that we were beneficiaries of the debt
incurred by Congress, or that we were in debt to the international bankers. Yet,
for generations, Americans have had the bulk of their earnings confiscated to
pay a massive debt that they did not incur. There’s an endless stream of things
the People aren’t told. And, now that you are being told, how do you feel about
being made the recipient of a debt without your knowledge or consent? “After
passage of the Act of 1871 Congress set a series of subtle and overt deceptions
into motion, deceptions in the form of decisions that were meant to sell us down
the river. Over time, the Republic took it on the chin until it was knocked down
and counted out by a technical KO [knock out]. With the surrender of the
people’s gold in 1933, the ‘common herd’ was handed over to illegitimate law.
“Our corporate form of governance is based on Roman Civil Law and Admiralty,
or Maritime, Law, which is also known as the ‘Divine Right of Kings’ and the
‘Law of the Seas’ — another fact of American history not taught in our schools.
Actually, Roman Civil Law was fully established in the colonies before our nation
began, and then became managed by private international law. In other words,
the government — the government created for the District of Columbia via the
Act of 1871 – operates solely under Private International Law, not Common
Law, which was the foundation of our Constitutional Republic. “This fact has
impacted all Americans in concrete ways. For instance, although Private
International Law is technically only applicable within the District of Columbia,
and NOT in the other states of the Union, the arms of the Corporation of the
UNITED STATES are called ‘departments’ — i.e., the Justice Department, the
Treasury Department. And those departments affect everyone, no matter where
(in what state) they live. Guess what? Each department belongs to the
corporation — to the UNITED STATES.
“Refer to any UNITED STATES CODE (USC). Note the capitalization; this is
evidence of a corporation, not a Republic. For example, In Title 28 3002 (15)
(A) (B) (C), it is unequivocally stated that the UNITED STATES is a corporation.
Translation: the corporation is NOT a separate and distinct entity; it is not
disconnected from the government; it IS the government — your government.
This is extremely important! I refer to it as the ‘corporate EMPIRE of the UNITED
STATES,’ which operates under Roman Civil Law outside the original
Constitution. How do you like being ruled by a corporation? You say you’ll ask
your Congressperson about this? HA!! “Congress is fully aware of this deception.
So it’s time that you, too, become aware of the deception. What this great
deception means is that the members of Congress do NOT work for us, for you
and me. They work for the Corporation, for the UNITED STATES. No wonder we
can’t get them to do anything on our behalf, or meet or demands, or answer our
“Technically, legally, or any other way you want to look at the matter, the
corporate government of the UNITED STATES has no jurisdiction or authority in
ANY State of the Union (the Republic) beyond the District of Columbia. Let that
tidbit sink in, then ask yourself, could this deception have occurred without full
knowledge and complicity of the Congress? Do you think it happened by
accident? If you do, you’re deceiving yourself.
“There are no accidents, no coincidences. Face the facts and confront the truth.
Remember, you are presumed to know the law. THEY know you don’t know the
law or, for that matter, your history. Why? Because no concerted effort was
ever made to teach or otherwise inform you. As a Sovereign, you are entitled to
full disclosure of all facts. As a slave, you are entitled to nothing other than
what the corporation decides to ‘give’ you.
“Remember also that ‘Ignorance of the law is no excuse.’ It’s your responsibility
and obligation to learn the law and know how it applies to you. No wonder the
corporation counted on the fact that most people are too indifferent,
unconcerned, distracted, or lazy to learn what they need to know to survive
within the system. We have been conditioned to let the government do our
thinking for us. Now’s the time to turn that around if we intend to help save our
Republic and ourselves — before it’s too late.
“As an instrument of the international bankers, the UNITED STATES owns you
from birth to death. It also holds ownership of all your assets, of your property,
even of your children. Think long and hard about all the bills taxes, fines, and
licenses you have paid for or purchased. Yes, they had you by the pockets. If
you don’t believe it, read the 14th Amendment. See how ‘free’ you really are.
Ignorance of the facts led to your silence. Silence is construed as consent;
consent to be beneficiaries of a debt you did not incur. As a Sovereign People
we have been deceived for hundreds of years; we think we are free, but in truth
we are servants of the corporation.
“Congress committed treason against the People in 1871. Honest men could
have corrected the fraud and treason. But apparently there weren’t enough
honest men to counteract the lust for money and power. We lost more freedom
than we will ever know, thanks to corporate infiltration of our so-called
‘government.’ “Do you think that any soldier who died in any of our many wars
would have fought if he or she had known the truth? Do you think one person
would have laid down his/her life for a corporation? How long will we remain
silent? How long will we perpetuate the MYTH that we are free? When will we
stand together as One Sovereign People? When will we take back what has been
as stolen from the us?
“If the People of America had known to what extent their trust was betrayed,
how long would it have taken for a real revolution to occur? What we now need
is a Revolution in THOUGHT. We need to change our thinking, then we can
change our world. Our children deserve their rightful legacy — the liberty our
ancestors fought to preserve, the legacy of a Sovereign and Fully Free People.”
July 5, 2013
The following 7-minute video, Solving 9-11: Exposing the Deception, provides a basic explanation of how the government and controlled media have deceived and misinformed the public about the events of 9-11. This deception has been used to wage wars of aggression and impose radical changes on American society. Exposing the 9-11 deception is the first essential step in solving the criminal atrocity and ending the tyranny that followed in its wake.
Video Link – http://youtu.be/UL5yNv4Jnu8
Seated on a stool before an audience packed with spooks, lawmakers, lawyers and mercenaries, CNN’s Wolf Blitzer introduced recently retired CENTCOM chief General James Mattis. “I’ve worked with him and I’ve worked with his predecessors,” Blitzer said of Mattis. “I know how hard it is to run an operation like this.”
Reminding the crowd that CENTCOM is “really, really important,” Blitzer urged them to celebrate Mattis: “Let’s give the general a round of applause.”
Following the gales of cheering that resounded from the room, Mattis, the gruff 40-year Marine veteran who once volunteered his opinion that “it’s fun to shoot some people,” outlined the challenge ahead. The “war on terror” that began on 9/11 has no discernable end, he said, likening it to the “the constant skirmishing between [the US cavalry] and the Indians” during the genocidal Indian Wars of the 19th century.
“The skirmishing will go on likely for a generation,” Mattis declared.
Mattis’ remarks, made beside a cable news personality who acted more like a sidekick than a journalist, set the tone for the entire 2013 Aspen Security Forum this July. A project of the Aspen Institute, the Security Forum brought together the key figures behind America’s vast national security state, from military chieftains like Mattis to embattled National Security Agency Chief General Keith Alexander to top FBI and CIA officials, along with the bookish functionaries attempting to establish legal groundwork for expanding the war on terror.
Partisan lines and ideological disagreements faded away inside the darkened conference hall, as a parade of American securitocrats from administrations both past and present appeared on stage to defend endless global warfare and total information awareness while uniting in a single voice of condemnation against a single whistleblower bunkered inside the waiting room of Moscow International Airport: Edward Snowden.
With perhaps one notable exception, none of the high-flying reporters junketed to Aspen to act as interlocutors seemed terribly interested in interrogating the logic of the war on terror. The spectacle was a perfect window into the world of access journalism, with media professionals brown-nosing national security elites committed to secrecy and surveillance, avoiding overly adversarial questions but making sure to ask the requisite question about how much Snowden has caused terrorists to change their behavior.
Jeff Harris, the communications director for the Aspen Institute, did not respond to questions I submitted about whether the journalists who participated in the Security Forum accepted fees. (It is likely that all relied on Aspen to at least cover lodging and travel costs). CNN sponsored the forum through a special new website called CNN Security Clearance, promoting the event through Twitter and specially commissioned op-eds from participating national security figures like former CIA director John McLaughlin.
Another forum sponsor was Academi, the private mercenary corporation formerly known as Blackwater. In fact, Academi is Blackwater’s third incarnation (it was first renamed “Xe”) since revelations of widespread human rights abuses and possible war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan threw the mercenary firm into full damage control mode. The Aspen Institute did not respond to my questions about whether accepting sponsorship from such an unsavory entity fit within its ethical guidelines.
John Ashcroft, the former Attorney General who prosecuted the war on terror under the administration of George W. Bush, appeared at Aspen as a board member of Academi. Responding to a question about U.S. over-reliance on the “kinetic” approach of drone strikes and special forces, Ashcroft reminded the audience that the U.S. also likes to torture terror suspects, not just “exterminate” them.
“It’s not true that we have relied solely on the kinetic option,” Ashcroft insisted. “We wouldn’t have so many detainees if we’d relied on the ability to exterminate people…We’ve had a blended and nuanced approach and for the guy who’s on the other end of a Hellfire missile he doesn’t see that as a nuance.”
While the international press plays up the information leaked by Edward Snowden as a revelation concerning the PRISM surveillance program, feigning to have discovered what everyone should already have known for a long time, Thierry Meyssan is particularly curious about the meaning of this rebellion. From this perspective, he attaches more importance to the case of General Cartwright, who has also been indicted for espionage.
- Former commander of the U.S. Strategic Command, former Vice-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, a former military adviser to President Obama, General James Cartwright is accused of spying: leaking to the New York Times information about the secret war against Iran in order to prevent an unnecessary war.
Are American public servants, civilian or military, who face a minimum of 30 years in prison for revealing U.S. state secrets to the press, “whistleblowers” exercising power in a democratic system or are they “resistors to oppression” at the hands of a military-police dictatorship? The answer to this question does not depend on our own political opinions, but on the nature of the U.S. government. The answer completely changes if we focus on the case of Bradley Manning, the young leftist Wikileaks soldier, or if we consider that of General Cartwright, military adviser to President Obama, indicted Thursday, 27 June 2013, for spying.
Here, a look back is needed to understand how one shifts from “espionage” in favor of a foreign power to “disloyalty” to a criminal organization that employs you.
Worse than censorship: the criminalization of sources
The President of the United States and Nobel Peace Prize laureate, Woodrow Wilson, tried to confer on the Executive branch the power to censor the press when “national security” or “the reputation of the government” are in play. In his speech on State of the Union (7th of December 1915), he said: “There are citizens of the United States … who have poured the poison of disloyalty into the very arteries of our national life, who tried to drag the authority and reputation of our government in contempt … to destroy our industries … and degrade our policy in favor of foreign intrigue …. We are without adequate federal laws …. I urge you to do nothing less than save the honor and self-respect of the nation. Such creatures of passion, disloyalty, and anarchy must be crushed.”
However, Congress did not heed him immediately. After the U.S. entry into the war, it passed the Espionage Act, taking in most of the British Official Secrets Act. It was no longer a matter of censoring the press, but of cutting off access to information by muzzling the custodians of state secrets. This device allows the Anglo-Saxons to present themselves as “defenders of freedom of expression“, though they are the worst violators of the democratic right to information, constitutionally defended by the Scandinavian countries.
Silence, not secrecy
Thus, the Anglo-Americans are less informed about what is happening at home than are foreigners. For example, during World War II, the United States, the United Kingdom and Canada managed to keep under wraps something as big as theManhattan Project, that created the first nuclear bomb, while it employed 130,000 people for 4 years and it was widely penetrated by foreign intelligence services. Why? Because Washington did not prepare the weapon for this war, but for the next, against the Soviet Union. As shown by Russian historians, the abdication of Japan was postponed until after Hiroshima and Nagasaki were destroyed as a warning to the USSR. If Americans had known that their country possessed such a weapon, their leaders would have had to use it to finish with Germany and not to threaten the Soviet ally at the expense of the Japanese. In reality, the Cold War began before the end of World War II .
In terms of secrecy, it should be noted that Stalin and Hitler were informed of the Manhattan Project from its inception. They indeed had inside agents. Meanwhile Truman was informed in his capacity as vice president, but only at the last moment, after the death of President Roosevelt.
The real utility of the Espionage Act
In any event, the Espionage Act deals only secondarily with espionage as shown by its jurisprudence.
In wartime, it is used to punish dissent. Thus, in 1919, the Supreme Court recognized in Schrenck v. United States andAbrams v. United States that calling for insubordination or non-intervention against the Russian Revolution fell under theEspionage Act.
In peacetime, the same law serves to prevent public officials from exposing a system of fraud or crimes committed by the state, even if their revelations are already known, but not yet proven.
Under the administration of Barack Obama, the Espionage Acthas been invoked 8 times, a peacetime record. Let’s put aside the case of John Kiriakou, a CIA officer who revealed the detention and torture of Abu Zubaydah. Far from being a hero, Kiriakou is actually an agent provocateur funded by the Agency, whose role it was to delude the public regarding pseudo-confessions extorted from Zubaydah to justify, a posteriori, the “fight against terrorism” .
Let’s also eliminate the case of Shamal Leibowitz, since his revelations were never released to the public. There remain six cases instructing us about the U.S. military-police system.
Stephen Jin-Woo Kim confirmed to Fox News that North Korea was preparing a nuclear test regardless of U.S. threats; a confirmation that caused no harm to the USA other than pointing out their inability to be obeyed by North Korea. In another context, this information had already been released by Bob Woodward without provoking reactions.
Andrew Thomas Drake revealed the mismanagement of theTrailblazer program to a member of the U.S. House of Representatives Intelligence Committee. He was alleged to have informed those congressmen tasked with keeping an eye on the intelligence agencies with regard to the billions that the NSA was secretly throwing out the window. Trailblazer sought to find a way to plant viruses on any computer or mobile phone. It has never worked.
In a similar vein, Edward Snowden, an employee of the Booz Allen Hamilton technology consulting firm, published various NSA documents attesting to U.S. spying in China as well as on the guests of the British G20. Above all, he has revealed the scope of the military phone tapping and internet spy system, which no one can escape, not even the President of the United States. U.S. politicians described Snowden as “a traitor to kill” only because his documents prevent the NSA from continuing to deny before Congress activities long known to all.
Bradley Manning, a simple soldier, sent to Wikileaks videos of two blunders by the army, 500,000 intelligence reports on military bases in Afghanistan and Iraq, and 250,000 cables on the information gathered by U.S. diplomats in conversations with foreign politicians. None of this is of paramount importance, but the documentation projects a poor image of the gossip collected by the State Department to serve as the basis for its “diplomacy.”
Jeffrey Alexander Sterling is a CIA employee who revealed “Operation Merlin” to the New York Times. More surprisingly, General James Cartwright was number two man in the military, in his capacity as Vice-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and so close an advisor to the President as to be dubbed “Obama’s general“. He supposedly revealed “Operation Olympic Games” to the New York Times last year and has been placed under investigation, according to CNN.
Sterling and Cartwright don’t buy into the Israeli myth of “the atomic bomb of the mullahs.” So they tried to defuse the war into which Tel Aviv is trying to plunge their country. “Operation Merlin” consisted in sending to Iran false information about the manufacture of the bomb. In reality, it was supposed to push Iran to engage in a military nuclear program to justify a posteriori the Israeli accusation . As for “Operation Olympic Games,” it was meant to implant the Stuxnet and Flame viruses in the Natanz plant, to disrupt its operation, notably that of its centrifuges . It was therefore intended to block Iran’s civilian nuclear program. None of these revelations damaged U.S. interests, but they hindered Israeli ambitions.
A salon opposition presents the men indicted under theEspionage Act as “whistleblowers“, as if the United States today were a real democracy and they were alerting citizens to the need to correct some errors. In fact, what they show us is that in the United States, from a common soldier (Bradley Manning) to the second in command (General Cartwright), men are trying as best they can to fight against a dictatorial system in which they discover themselves to be a cog. Faced with a monstrous system, they ought to be celebrated as major resistance figures such as Admiral Canaris or Count Stauffenberg.
 “La Seconde Guerre mondiale aurait pu prendre fin en 1943” (The Second World War could have ended in 1943), “Si l’Armée rouge n’avait pas pris Berlin…” (If the Red Army had not taken Berlin …) and “La Conférence de Yalta offrait une chance qui n’a pas été saisie” (The Yalta Conference offered an opportunity that was not been seized), Viktor Litovkine interview with Valentin Faline, Ria-Novosti/Réseau Voltaire, 30 March, 1 and 6 April 2005.
 “Abu Zubaydah Poses a Real Threat to Al Qaeda” and “Forgetting Torture: Lee Hamilton, John Brennan, and Abu Zubaydah”, by Kevin Ryan,Voltaire Network, 19 January and 13 March 2013.
 State of War : The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration, by James Risen, Free Press, 2006.
 “Obama Order Sped Up Wave of Cyberattacks Against Iran“, by David E. Sanger, The New York Times, 1 June 2012. “Did America’s Cyber Attack on Iran Make Us More Vulnerable?“, by Marc Ambinder, The Atlantic, 5 June 2012. “The rewards (and risks) of cyber war“, by Steve Call, The New Yorker, 7 June 2012. “U.S., Israel developed Flame computer virus to slow Iranian nuclear efforts, officials say“, by Ellen Nakashima, Greg Miller and Julie Tate,The Washington Post, 19 June 2012.
From the National Journal this week:Franken, the Minnesota Democrat who is on the Senate Judiciary Committee, knew about the data-mining. Or at least that’s what he told Minnesota’s WCCO on Tuesday. “I can assure you, this is not about spying on the American people”, Franken said. The senator also believes the data collection has saved American lives:
“I have a high level of confidence that this is used to protect us, and I know that it has been successful in preventing terrorism.
There are certain things that are appropriate for me to know that is not appropriate for the bad guys to know.”
Franken’s claim to political pedigree is that was a champion of liberalism through his radio persona which he got into after he ran out of jokes for SNL. Here the Franken-Chameleondemonstrates his adeptness in changing his liberal stripes when deferring to the weight of the NSA’s over-arching power is on display.
Franken-Chameleon shape-shifts further on the issue of NSA spying, as explained by journalist Norman Solomon:
“Franken is now saying he’ll introduce a bill for “transparency” because the public will support the current surveillance programs if they grasp what’s really involved: ” I think that if there were greater transparency, Americans would have a better understanding of these programs.” Count on transparency to be a buzzword cloak for more of the same.”
This craft of speaking out of two sides of the mouth is the current modus operandi employed by shape-shifting politicians who are more concerned with self-preservation than actually being in touch with the mood of the public. It’s for this reason that America is witnessing the most impotent and disfunctional federal government in the nation’s history.
This level of shape-shifting can make any observer dizzy who’s attempting to get a political fix on a creature like the Franken-Chameleon, but it gets more bizarre, as the NJ points out here:
In an early 2006 AlterNet interview before he was officially running for Senate, Franken disparaged the Bush administration’s NSA warrantless-surveillance program, laughing off a similar rationale to the one he’s used in part to justify the current program:
“They’re trying to justify these warrantless wiretaps by saying, “Oh, it’s al-Qaida!” One guy is saying it’s just al-Qaida–the Hayden guy, and then on the other hand, you hear from the FBI that they were inundated with referrals on all kinds of stuff with these calls, so much so that they couldn’t get to their real work, and that none of the referrals led anywhere.”
So there’s Mr. Al Franken – the actor and comedian, who made his name as a liberal radio host and ran for Senate as a liberal “man of the people” – yet, it’s men like this who are working hard to undermine the Constitutional efforts of men like Congressman Justin Amash, whose NSA anti-snooping Amendment proposal known as “a vow to defend the Fourth Amendment” amendment.
It’s important to define the Fourth Amendment in terms of the federal government and the NSA’s desire to spy and profile and archive its citizen’s digital communications. The Fourth Amendment states:
“ The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. “
Unfortunately, Amash’s anti-NSA measure was killed in the House as 134 Republicans and 83 Democrats votes were cast against it.
Amash defeat did reveal however, that the odd Franken-Chameleon is one of many invertebrate animals living in the nation’s capital, all of whom are easily intimidated into doing the bidding of another older, dinosaur-like vertebrate creature who roams the Hill – a deadly female reptilian beast known as the Pelosis-Lacertas.
The Pelosis-Lacertas was seen calling an emergency meeting in advance of the NSA Amendement vote which was absolutely pivotal in defeating Justin Amash’s constitutional effort.
On the pro-liberty side/pro-constitutional side, 94 Republicans and 111 Democrats displayed some backbone by voting yes, but it wasn’t quite enough, as the measure lost, 217-205.
Make no mistake about it, Minnesota’s Democrat Senator Al Franken is now officially, “A Friend of the NSA”, and therefore, in opposition of the US Constitution.
July 2, 2013
Are “Innocent” verdicts discrediting the jury system?
Excessive media coverage suggests this may be deliberate.
“If I had to guess, and I certainly may be wrong, the jury is going to find George Zimmerman innocent. And the media will then cry: “Once again, the jury system has failed!”
By James Perloff
In what was called “the trial of the century,” a jury declared O. J. Simpson innocent of a double murder in 1995, despite powerful evidence of his guilt. It was hard to believe Simpson’s famous escape attempt in his blood-stained Ford Bronco was the act of an innocent man. I recall feeling anger toward the jurors who freed him.
More recently, many trials have received disproportionate attention. In 2011, the Casey Anthony case became the subject of furious media coverage. Initially, I wondered if Anthony was a celebrity. But no, she was just a party girl accused of duct-taping her two-year-old daughter’s mouth and suffocating her, so she could enjoy her lifestyle unhampered by child care. While the crime was heinous; it did not seem to merit the extravagant media blitz.
During the trial, the media painted an increasingly unsavory portrait of Anthony. But as the verdict approached, I began getting an uneasy feeling: namely, that an “innocent” verdict had been prearranged and would be used to provoke anger toward the jury system, especially among conservatives sympathetic to family values. After the “innocent” verdict was rendered, AOL ran this headline: “Casey Gets Ready to Party.”
As in the OJ case, nationwide outrage followed, and new laws–collectively dubbed “Caylee’s Law,” in honor of Anthony’s daughter–were proposed to criminalize parents who failed to report missing children within a mandated time period.
The latest case to earn undue national publicity is that of George Zimmerman, on trial for the 2012 shooting of 17-year old Afro-American Trayvon Martin. The media is missing no opportunity to fan flames of racial bitterness. For example, this past week, criticisms of the mumbling testimony of witness Rachel Jeantel have been denounced as originating with “racists” who fail to appreciate Black English.
If I had to guess, and I certainly may be wrong, the jury is going to find George Zimmerman innocent. And the media will then cry: “Once again, the jury system has failed!” This time it will be the Afro-American community’s turn to get angry at juries. Here’s a little “preview” of a CNN panel discussion:
CNN Anchor: “What does this case mean for America?”
Pundit No. 1: “Clearly, the time has come to reexamine the relevance of the jury system–a system designed for the horse and buggy era. Today’s criminology methods involve cutting-edge technology, such as DNA testing and cyber-detection, which were unknown to the so-called Founding Fathers. Today, your average jury member simply does not have the expertise necessary to digest these methods. It’s time we took these verdicts out of the hands of “Joe Schmo” and turned them over to bona-fide experts.”
Pundit No 2: “I agree! We would not have these spontaneous race riots (taking place in the wake of the Zimmerman verdict) had the decision not been placed in the hands of unqualified individuals. Justice and common sense simply cry out for an end to this antiquated system.”
Pundit No. 3: “And let’s not forget that CNN’s new poll shows that Americans don’t like the disruption to their lives caused by participating in juries. We’re a democracy! Should we ignore the will of the people? Forty-five years ago, participation in military–the “draft”–was required for all young American men. Wisely, we dispensed with that unpopular system and replaced it with an army of professionals. It’s high time the jury system went down the same path!”
CNN Anchor: “Well, there you have it, folks. A clear-cut consensus of expert opinion that the time has come to begin the process of rethinking the jury system. Indeed, at a press conference in Washington today, Nancy Pelosi suggested a new law that would…”
The entire Bill of Rights is currently under intense assault. Freedom of speech is increasingly disallowed if “politically incorrect.” Freedom of religion now takes a back seat to the new civil right called “gay rights.” A strangely exponential increase in gun crimes over the past year has led to demands to banish the right to bear arms.
Does anyone think the Illuminati would overlook the right to trial by jury? Nothing becomes a nationally celebrated media case without Illuminati approval–which means these show trials must have a place in their agenda. And of course, these trials also take our attention off the worst criminals–the Illuminati themselves.
A U.S. drone strike killed at least 17 people in Pakistan’s tribal region on Wednesday, Reuters reports.
Taliban commanders and security officials told Reuters that the strike mostly killed fighters for the Haqqani network.
But Reuters also reports this (emphasis ours):
Many were wounded in the attack, local tribesman Kaleemullah Dawar said, but rescuers delayed for fear of falling victim to a second attack, a common tactic with drone strikes.
That tactic is known as the “double tap,” which bombs multiple targets in relatively quick succession — meaning that the second strike often hits first responders.
In 2007 the FBI said the tactic as commonly used by terrorist organizations such as Hamas.
Last year a study by the NYU School of Law and Stanford Law School detailed the U.S. use of the double tap, providing first-hand accounts of its devastating effect on rescuers and humanitarian workers.
Last June the UN special rapporteur on extrajudicial killings Christof Heyns said he considers secondary strikes to be “war crimes.”
The NYU/Stanford report stated: “As international law experts have noted, intentional strikes on first responders may constitute war crimes.”
The fact that it is now normalized as a common tactic of the U.S. drone war is stunning.
Furthermore, Spencer Ackerman of The Guardian reports that a recent study conducted by a U.S. military adviser found that over the course of a year, U.S. drone strikes in Afghanistan caused 10 times more civilian casualties than strikes by manned fighter aircraft.
That finding contradicts the common drone defense that the robotic planes are more precise than manned planes.
According to the study, drone strikes in Afghanistan were “an order of magnitude more likely to result in civilian casualties per engagement” than manned bombing runs.
Ackerman notes that the study appears to undermine a claim made by President Obama in May when he said “conventional airpower or missiles are far less precise than drones, and likely to cause more civilian casualties and local outrage.”
After a decade of drone warfare, it’s becoming clear that the U.S. has set a dangerous precedent for the rest of the world.
Proving that idiocy truly has no bounds, Spain issued a “royal decree” taxing sunlight gatherers. The state threatens fines as much as 30 million euros for those who illegally gather sunlight without paying a tax.
The tax is just enough to make sure that homeowners cannot gather and store solar energy cheaper than state-sponsored providers.
Via Mish-modified Google Translate from Energias Renovables, please consider Photovoltaic Sector, Stunned
The Secretary of State for Energy, Alberto Nadal, signed a draft royal decree in which consumption taxes are levied on those who want to start solar power systems on their rooftops. The tax, labeled a “backup toll” is high enough to ensure that it will be cheaper to keep buying energy from current providers.
Spain Privatizes the Sun
Via Google translate from El Pais, please consider Spain Privatizes The Sun
If you get caught collecting photons of sunlight for your own use, you can be fined as much as 30 million euros.
If you were thinking the best energy option was to buy some solar panels that were down 80% in price, you can forget about it.
“Of all the possible scenarios, this is the worst,” said José Donoso, president of the Spanish Photovoltaic Union (UNEF), which represents 85% of the sector’s activity.
Before the decree it took 12 years to recover the investment in a residential installation of 2.4 kilowatts of power. Following the decree, it will take an additional 23 years according to estimates by UNEF.
Petition of the Candle Makers Revisited
And so the “Petition of the Candle Makers” comes to pass.
I have written about the “petition” on many occasions, but here is the latest reference: Extremely Difficult to Keep Up With Economic Stupidity
Reflections on “Unfair Competition”
Corporations always consider it “unfair” when any other company can do things faster, smarter, or cheaper than they can. The buggy whip industry once protested cars.
Today, land-line telecom companies have to compete with wireless and they don’t like it. Now, we see protests about VOIP (voice over internet protocol).
Technology marches on. But France does not like it. The French solution is to tax Skype because it has an “unfair advantage“.
This is an age-old unwinnable argument.
Petition of the Candle Makers
The ultimate irony is France’s preposterous “unfair advantage” argument was lampooned by French economist Frederic Bastiat back in 1845 when he penned ‘Petition of the Candle Makers‘.
In his article, candle makers were incensed that the light of the sun could be had for free. The sun’s unfair trade advantage was to the “detriment of fair industries” who could not compete against the sun’s price.
Something had to be done to “shut off as much as possible, all access to natural light, and thereby create a need for artificial light” so that “industry in France will encouraged”.
The moral to this story is “Don’t propose something purposefully stupid hoping to make a point. Some idiot might actually think it’s a good idea and do it”.
President Clinton may be in his final year of office but he leaves in his wake a trail of allegations that, if true, would rank him alongside some of history’s most notorious criminals. He has been implicated in cocaine use by none other than his younger brother Roger Clinton, himself a convicted drug trafficker. In an Arkansas State Police surveillance audio tape, obtained by freelance journalist Scott Wheeler, Roger Clinton can be heard describing how he smuggled large amounts of cocaine through airports. Most significant were his comments about the then Arkansas State Governor, “Got to get some for my brother; he’s got a nose like a vacuum cleaner.”
This is not just groundless speculation. In 1990 Sharlene Wilson, an informant for the Seventh Judicial drug task force in Arkansas, testified under oath that she had supplied Governor Bill Clinton with cocaine. Shortly thereafter the drug task force was closed down and Wilson herself was charged with drug violations. In 1992 she was sentenced to 31 years for selling half an ounce of marijuana and $100 worth of methamphetamine. Clinton’s misdemeanors amount to more than drug use though, much more. One of the first things Clinton did on assuming the presidency was to appoint Patsy Thomasson – a top lieutenant of convicted drug dealer Dan Lasater – as White House chief of personnel. Clinton then installed his friend Webster Hubbel as “shadow” Attorney General, until Hubbel was jailed for fraud. Prior to his becoming assistant Attorney General he had been over billing clients at the Rose Law firm, in Little Rock Arkansas, where he had been a partner with Hilary Clinton.
Then we have the “suicide” of Vincent Foster. As reported in The SPOTLIGHT, featured in the previous edition of The Seeker, Forster had been deeply disturbed by events at Waco and had been in the process of preparing a potentially damming report. So Clinton had good reason to want him out of the way and as many suspect his death was not a suicide; eyewitness accounts by police and ambulance crew members who recovered Foster’s body and official autopsy findings are distinctly at odds. One of the reasons that Clinton has been able to get away with so much is the compliance of the mainstream media. As one of the few journalist’s who has covered Clinton’s time in office with any honesty and insight, Ambrose Pritchard-Evans noted:
“The Washington press corps has chosen not to report this sort of thing, of course, because it always gives more weight to the utterings of an “official” source, with a title, than it does to the testimony of a common citizen.”
As a result Clinton has been allowed to get away with murder, almost literally. Yet he is guilty of far more. He has been implicated in rape, sexual assault, mass murder (Waco) and, as we detailed in a previous issue, War crimes in Iraq and the former Yugoslavia. Indeed it is no exaggeration to say that history may well place Bill Clinton alongside the likes of Nero and Caligula. Here then is a list of people who have been connected in some way with Bill Clinton and who have died in rather suspicious circumstances:
1) Susan Coleman: said to have had an affair with Clinton before he became President. Told friends she was expecting his child and was 7 months pregnant when she found dead with a gunshot wound to the head. Verdict, suicide.
2)Larry Guerrin: killed while investigating the INSLAW case. In brief this involved the US Justice Department using stolen software, modifying it for intelligence purposes and then selling it to foreign governments and making millions in the process.
3) Kevin Ives and Don Henry: two 16 year old boys who may have stumbled across drug running operations involving Clinton at Mena airfield in Arkansas in 1987.Initial reports, by State Medical Examiner Fahmy Malak, suggested that the boys had fallen asleep on the railway line and been crushed. However when the parents kicked up a fuss another forensic report showed Kevin’s skull had been crushed prior to being placed on the track whilst Don had been stabbed in the back.
4) Keith Coney said he had information on Ives and Henry deaths. Died in a high-speed motorcycle crash in 1989,said to have involved a car chase.
5) Keith McKaskle, said to have information on the Ives and Henry deaths. Stabbed to death in November 1988.
6) Gregory Collins, once again said to have information on the Ives and Henry deaths and once again killed, this time by a gunshot wound to the face.
7) Jeff Rhodes was also said to have information on the deaths of Ives and Henry.He was found on a waste heap in April 1989 with a gunshot wound to the head.
8. James Milam also had information on the Ives and Henry deaths but before he could talk too widely he was found decapitated. Once again the State Medical Examiner, Fahmy Malak, ruled the death due to natural causes.
9) Richard Winters, a suspect in the Ives and Henry case had offered to cooperate and give evidence. However he died in a ‘robbery’, which was subsequently proved to have been a set-up.
10) Jordan Kettleson was also said to have information on the Ives and Henry deaths. He was found shot dead in his pick-up in June 1990.
11) Danny Casalaro, a journalist investigating Mena airstrip, the Arkansas coke trade and INSLAW. Had warned his family that he had learnt too much and not to believe it was suicide if he turned up dead. Shortly thereafter he was found in a bathtub in the Sheraton Hotel in Martinsburg, West Virginia. Both his wrists had been slashed, one ten times, all his research material was missing and has never been recovered
12) Victor Raiser, the National Co-Chair for the “Clinton for President” campaign, died in an airplane crash in July, 1992.
13) R Montgomery Raiser also worked on the Clinton campaign and died in the same crash.
14) Ian Spiro, said to have supporting documentation for grand jury proceedings in the INSLAW case. His wife and three children were found murdered in their home in November 1992.All had gunshot wounds to the head. Ian’s body later was found in a car in the Borrego Desert. FBI reports concluded that he had shot his family and then committed suicide by taking cyanide.
15) Paula Grober, Clinton’s speech interpreter for the deaf. Killed in car smash with no other cars involved and no witnesses. She is said to have been very attractive and traveled extensively with Clinton prior to her death in December 1992. All the above died prior to Clinton’s inauguration in January 1993.In its aftermath the deaths not only continued but became even more numerous.
16) Steve Willis, Robert Williams, Todd McKeahan and Conway LeBleu were the only four BAFT men killed at Waco.In an autopsy performed by a “private Doctor” all four were found to have near identical “execution style” head wounds. All four had previously been bodyguards for Clinton prior to their deaths in April 1993.
17) Sgt. Brian Haney, Sgt.Tim Sabel, Maj. William Barkley and Capt. Scott Reynolds. Once again all four men had been bodyguards for Clinton prior to their deaths in a helicopter crash near Quantico, Va. Reporters were barred from the scene whilst firefighters responding to the crash had their video tapes seized and a fire cheif described a scene where, “security was tight” with “lots of marines with guns.”
18) Paul Wilcher was found dead shortly after presenting Attorney General Janet Reno with a report on Waco, death ruled to “unknown causes.” See extracts from the report in this issue.
19) White House deputy counsel Vincent Foster was said to have been preparing a potentially damming report on Waco at the time of his death. As reported in the previous issue he had been deeply disturbed by events at Waco and his death, in July 1993, was officially labeled a “suicide.”.
20) Stanley Heard and Steven Dickson were members of Clinton’s Health Advisory Committee. Both died in an air crash in September 1993.
21) Jerry Luther Parks, Chief of Security at Clinton’s national campaign headquarters in Little Rock. He was shot through the rear window of his car, the killer then went to the driver’s side of Park’s car and pumped three more 9mm bullets into him. His family reported that shortly before his death their home had been broken into, despite a top line security system. Park’s had been preparing a dossier on Clinton’s activities, the dossier was stolen.
22) Ed Willey, a Clinton fundraiser, was found shot dead in November 1993.Once again the death was ruled suicide. His wife Kathleen, who was working as a White House volunteer at the time, claimed that Clinton sexually assaulted her when she had approached him, distraught over the loss of her husband.
Indeed allegations of sexual assault and even rape go back a long way with Clinton.As far back as 1969 in fact when Clinton was still a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford University. A retired State Department employee said he believed a young English woman who claimed she had been raped by Clinton.
“There was no doubt in my mind that this young woman had suffered severe emotional trauma,” he said. “But we were under tremendous pressure to aviod the embarrassment of having a Rhodes Scholar charged with rape. I filed a report with my superiors and that was the last I heard of it.”
She is not the only woman who has accused Clinton of rape. Early in 1999 Juanita Broaddrick, an Arkansas woman who worked on Clinton’s campaign when he was attorney general in 1978, told NBC that he had raped her.Claiming pressure from the White House NBC shelved the report.
Then we have the case of Elizabeth Ward, a former Miss Arkansas who claimed that Clinton had forced himself on her shortly after she won the State crown. In 1999 she told an interviewer that she did have sex with him but that it was consensual; she later recanted saying that she had been threatened by Clinton supporters into claiming the sex was consensual. And still the killings go on…
23) Dr Roland Rogers a Dentist from Arkansas. Died on his way to the Sunday Telegraph in London to reveal “sensitive” information about Clinton in March 1994
24) Kathy Furguson, a 38-year-old hospital worker whose ex-husband was a co-defendant in the Paula Jones case. She died in May 1994, from a gunshot wound to the head, ruled suicide; curiously next to the body were several packed suitcases, as if she was getting ready to go somewhere.
25) Bill Shelton was Kathy’s boyfriend and an Arkansas police officer. He was found on her grave the following month with a gunshot wound to the back of the head. Judged to be “suicide”.
26) Alan G Whither, oversaw Clinton’s Secret Service detail. He was transferred to a field office in Oklahoma City in October 1994.Whatever warning was given to the other BAFT agents in the building (none of whom came to work that day) failed to reach him, he died on April 19 1995 in the infamous Oklahoma City bomb blast. Incidentally the families of the victims of the blast are now preparing to sue the U.S. Government, saying it had prior knowledge of the bombing.
27) Ron Brown, Commerce Secretary died along with 35 other people on April 3,1996, in an air crash involving Airforce 2. At the time of his death Brown was being investigated and had spoken publicly of his willingness to cut a deal with prosecuters. According to one report he allegedly told Clinton, “he was not going down alone.” However his death brought that possibility to an abrupt end. A pathologist close to the investigation reported that there was a hole in the back of Brown’s head that resembled a gunshot wound. And we are not counting the other 35 people who died in the same crash.
28) Shelly Kelly, an Air Force stewardess was onboard the same flight, at the back of the plane, and suffered only minor cuts and bruises in the crash. Indeed she was able to board a rescue helicopter without assistance. She died later died in hospital, supposedly from a loss of blood. According to journalist Joe L Jordan, an autopsy revealed a three inch cut over her main femoral artery which was sustained over three hours after all her other cuts and bruises. Thereafter Clinton ordered the bodies of all the victims cremated.
29) Barbara Wise, a Commerce Department employee. She was found dead in her locked office, partially nude and covered in bruises, following a long weekend. Officially she is said to have died of natural causes.
30) Christine M Mirzayan, Clinton intern killed on August 1 1998.In the publicity prior to the Paula Jones law suit Newsweek revealed that “a former White House staffer” with the initial “M” was about to go public with a story about sexual harassment at the White House. Thereafter Christine was found beaten to death with a heavy object near Georgetown University, Washington.
31) Mary Mahoon was another former White House intern who was about to go public with a story of sexual harassment at the White House. Before she could though some unknown characters entered a Washington Starbuck’s, where she was working, and shot her dead. Her two assistants’, Aaron Goodrich, 18 and Emory Evans were taken to a room along with Mary and pumped full of bullets. Mary was shot in the chest, face and back of the head, probably with silencers as nobody in the densely populated area heard anything. Even though the killers left $4000 in the cashbox untouched, the police categorized the killings as a robbery whilst acknowledging its “execution style”.
As reported in the previous issue of the Seeker four members of Delta Force have recently died in training “accidents”. They were Lt Col Anthony A. Boyles and Sgt Eric Ellingson, killed in river “training accidents.” Master Sgt Gaetano Cutino, killed while “exiting” from a helicopter. And Sgt Jamey Dimase killed while participating in marksmanship training. These were the men who had actually gone into the Branch Davidian compound at Waco and carried out the killings of 86 men, women and children. These men were hardened professional killers, yet even they had been disturbed by what they had been ordered to do and actually done. So much so that given immunity from prosecution they had been prepared to come forward and testify. Although Paul Wilcher does not name them in his report these were the very individuals whose testimony could have demolished Clinton’s Presidency.
The Wilcher Report was buried along with Paul Wilcher and for a while things went on as before, in other words the killings went on and on. Then in 1999 the Wilcher Report resurfaced, when Attorney General Janet Reno was told she expressed “total anger”. According to unnamed eyewitnesses quoted in the Drudge Report: “Her face was flushed, she was clearly shaken.” In the following months the four Delta Force men all died in “training accidents”: to quote Paul Wilcher, “to silence their testimony forever.”
Gennifer Flowers was a bit smarter. She had a 12 year affair with Clinton, in its aftermath her apartment was broken into and ransacked and she and her mother received threatening phone calls. Realising that she was in danger she assumed a higher profile, launched legal proceedings against Clinton and embarked on a series of media appearances. Smart girl, it was probably this that saved her life, had she not done so she too would have been on this list. Finally it should be noted that this is only a partial list, for a more comprehensive picture we would refer you to some of the sources listed below.
Daniel Harris and Teresa Hampton,Capitol Hill Blue
Ambrose Pritchard-Evans writing in The Telegraph and the Sunday Telegraph.
On October 18, 2013 the only appeals panel with the power to overrule the CIA — the Interagency Security Classification Appeals Panel ISCAP — sent notification that Americans are not yet ready to know the contents of the memos (ISCAP decision). This denial of public release of decades-old secrets concerning U.S.-Israel relations is far from unique.
Although the Obama administration promised unprecedented transparency, it has emasculated the public’s ability to give informed consent on a wide range of key foreign policy issues. A review of ten particularly toxic U.S. secrets about Israel suggests stakeholders should start assuming the worst but most logical explanation.
In 2006 former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld famously told reporters at an Iraq war briefing:
“There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don’t know we don’t know.”
Bush administration secrecy and Rumsfeld’s pithy quotes failed to quell gradual public awareness that the ill-fated invasion was launched on purposely fabricated pretexts. And yet the Iraq debacle could have been avoided if Americans had been better informed over time how government truly functions through greater access to the fourth category left unmentioned by Rumsfeld: “unknown knowns.”
“Unknown knowns” are the paradigm-shifting bits of information known only by a select few in government but kept from their fellow American citizens because they would reveal indefensible, secret policies and institution-level corruption that favor a special interest.
By locking “unknown knowns” under heavy guard in document archives, covering them in secrecy classification stamps and making an example out of whistleblowers who release them without authorization, busy bureaucrats with the highest security clearances maintain a vast and growing trove of “unknown knowns.”
Historians and watchdog organizations are continually thwarted in their mandate to contextualize and educate the public about relevant past events that could deeply inform the governed—and ultimately improve governance. Senator Carl Schurz said, “My country right or wrong, if right, to be kept right, and if wrong, to be set right.” “Unknown knowns” obliterate the public’s ability to execute the latter two-thirds of that sage advice.
Even the passage of time does not guarantee “unknown knowns” ever become “known knowns.” Under current government records preservation guidelines — particularly for information that researchers are not actively seeking to declassify — some “unknown knowns” quietly become “unknown unknowns” as they decay, are physically destroyed, erased or “lost.”
Many knowledgeable former officials take their secrets to the grave. As a product of the ill-gotten power and influence of the Israel lobby, the pile of “unknown knowns” about U.S.-Israel policy is particularly large. Curious Americans who rightfully question official narratives about the U.S.-Israel “special relationship” have often requested “unknown knowns” under the Freedom of Information Act.
Former government insiders who know firsthand about explosive secrets often seek their public release to alert others using the Mandatory Declassification Review, even requesting documents by name, subject, location, author and date.
After such “unknown knowns” (like the LBJ memos) are unsuccessfully sought for decades by multiple researchers, well-warranted suspicions arise about the reasons behind the impermeable government wall of refusal. The following ten US-Israel policy “unknown knowns” suggest the Israel lobby’s ongoing corrupt power is the only possible explanation for why they are still secret.
1. Henry Morgenthau Jr’s Israel policy is the stuff of legend in accounts about the birth of Israel.
Some researchers claim that FDR’s former Treasury Secretary was present at the original 1945 meeting of American Zionists with Jewish Agency executive director David Ben-Gurion to set up the massive Haganah smuggling network to steal, illegally buy and smuggle surplus WWII arms from the U.S. to Jewish fighters in Palestine. (report PDF)
This was the first major broadly organized Israel lobby challenge to U.S. sovereignty. It successfully overrode American policy enshrined in neutrality and arms export laws. Others claim Morgenthau was also instrumental in the illicit financing Israel’s clandestine nuclear weapons program in direct opposition to policy set by American presidents.
The FBI’s dusty 10,000 page file on Morgenthau, numbered 105-HQ-188123 (the 105 code signifies “foreign counterintelligence”) including intercepts to Morgenthau from Israel, could finally clear up many of these allegations, especially when compared to current research.
Although the FBI — after a process that began in 2010 — in September 2013 claims it has fully declassified the Morgenthau file, censors have blanked out nearly every page with a paint-roller of black ink (sample PDF). How do high officials with strong ties to Israel and its lobby who are politically appointed to the U.S. Treasury Department flout U.S. laws with their own foreign-coordinated foreign policy movements? The FBI and Justice Department do not believe Americans are quite yet ready to know.
2. Eisenhower and the Lavon Affair.
In 1954, the Israeli government launched its “Operation Susannah” false flag terrorist attack on U.S. facilities in Egypt. Israel’s operatives were quickly arrested when bombs exploded prematurely. The operation’s utter failure resulted in a political crisis known as the Lavon Affair.
President Dwight D. Eisenhower, periodically swarmed by American Zionist Council lobbyists urging him to send money and arms to Israel, must have learned some very hard lessons about U.S.-Israel relations from the incident. Yet the Eisenhower presidential archive — which is not subject to FOIA — has never released anything revelatory about the administration’s reaction to the attempted false flag attack. A narrow request for such files yielded only a single non-specific declassified opinion that the commander-in-chief believed the Israelis were “fanatics.” (National Security Council PDF)
Yet the false flag operation’s objective, attacking to keep U.S. troops stationed in the Suez Canal Zone to respond to “Egyptian militants,” seemed entirely rational to Israel, and possibly to some of its U.S. supporters who struggled for years afterwards to minimize the importance of the affair. Today Eisenhower library archivists claim that huge quantities of Eisenhower’s papers are still “unprocessed,” but may hold some private reflections or lessons learned.
3. Israeli theft of nuclear material from NUMEC.
In 2013, the CIA continues to resist release of thousands of files about the NUMEC diversion by referring to CIA Deputy Director for Operations John H. Stein’s secret decision in 1979 (2013 FOIA denial PDF).
Stein claimed that release of even a few of CIA’s closely-held files — especially if they were compared with Science Advisor of the Interior Commission Henry Meyer’s blunt allegations (PDF) to Congressman Morris Udall in 1979 that NUMEC was an Israeli smuggling front — was impossible “because of the need to have a coordinated Executive Branch position and our desire to protect a sensitive and valuable liaison equity.”
In plain English, that appears to mean Americans still cannot have official CIA confirmation of the uranium theft because the U.S. president would have to drop the ongoing nonsense of “strategic ambiguity” and forego intelligence Israel is funneling to America.
4. FBI files of Israeli (but not Russian) spies Russia’s dashing red-headed spy, Anna Chapman, was arrested in 2010 and sent packing back Russia.
Any interested American can now watch Chapman’s moves in surveillance videos and read the FBI counterintelligence files.
Not so with most of Israel’s top spies who targeted American economic, nuclear and national defense infrastructure.
America is still crawling with Israeli spies (our “constant companion” according to intelligence expert Jeff Stein).
The 2010 revelations of nuclear equipment smuggling from Telogy (prohibited export smuggling PDF) in California and Stewart Nozette‘s 1998-2008 Israel Aerospace Industries-funded penetrations of classified U.S. information storehouses around Washington reveal that while Israeli spying has never stopped, secret prosecution strategies now emphasize quietly rolling up Israeli operations via industry regulators, fines and penalties or isolating and entrapping American spies on lesser charges but steering around their Israeli handlers.
Unlike its treatment of information requests about Russian spies, the FBI and Justice Department have denied every individual FOIA request for the files of major Israeli spies. Access to Rafael Eitan’s many harmful exploits against U.S. targets are banned from release unless Eitan personally waives his privacy rights (FOIA denial). The FBI claimed it can no longer find files about deceased nuclear espionage mastermind Avraham Hermoni, even though his name appears across many previously released NUMEC files (FOIA denial PDF).
Flooding from Hurricane Sandy is the excuse the FBI gives for not being able to find files on spy-for-Israel Ben Ami-Kadish (Flood FOIA denial PDF). One might argue it is merely a series of unfortunate events that keeps Israeli spy files out of public hands, except that the Justice Department has now issued a blanket ban on declassifying any files about the FBI’s decades-long counterintelligence tango with Israel’s Mossad. (Justice Department blanket denial PDF).
The results of the Justice Department’s kid-glove approach to Israel propagates into mandatory counterintelligence reports to Congress. Although Israel unambiguously ranked as a top economic and national defense intelligence threat in past assessments of agencies like the Office of National Counterintelligence Executive, because criminal prosecution strategies toward Israel (through not Iran, Russia or China) have been undermined from within, Israel has disappeared from the mostcurrent reports.
5. Jonathan J. Pollard’s most heinous crime.
Israel’s only American spy ever to do serious time in jail — despite the best efforts of his many American and Israeli supporters to spring him — once confidently claimed before he was convicted that “… it was the established policy of the Department of Justice not to prosecute U.S. citizens for espionage activities on behalf of Israel.” Many believe it was only Defense Secretary Casper Weinberger’s classified briefing to sentencing Judge Aubry Robinson that made Pollard the near sole exception to that curious rule.
Some Pentagon insiders and national security reporters believe Pollard’s sentence was so harsh because Israel used stolen U.S. intelligence as “trade goods” with the Soviet Union to increase Russian émigrés to Israel. As Pollard’s sentence draws to a close, few know exactly what Weinberger told Robinson that caused him to deliver a life sentence. The recent partial releases of a CIA damage assessment and a DIA video about Pollard shed little light.
In 2010, the Department of Defense disclaimed all ownership of the still-classified “Weinberger declaration” passing the FOIA ball to the Justice Department’s Criminal Division (FOIA transfer PDF).
In a novel approach, the Executive Office of US Attorneys now claims that it cannot find its own copy but that FOIA does not require EOUSA FOIA officers to travel two blocks to the DC District Court to retrieve a sealed copy of the memorandum for review (FOIA denial PDF) or even ask DOD for a copy.
The National Archives and Records Administration Office of Government Information Services OGIS agrees that there is no “duty for agencies to retrieve records that are not physically present in their own files.”
Although the 2008 case of Ben-Ami Kadish proves the Pollard espionage ring was much larger than was publicly disclosed in the late 1980s, the FBI has also not allowed release of its Jonathan Pollard investigation files (FOIA denial PDF) for overdue public review of how the investigation might have — like many others — been short-circuited by the Department of Justice because it involved Israel.
6. Wiretap of AIPAC pushing for a US war on Iran.
When AIPAC executives Keith Weissman and Steven J. Rosen dialed up Washington Post reporter Glenn Kessler in 2004, they were determined to leverage purloined classified U.S. national defense information into a story that Iran was engaged in “total war” against the US in Iraq. FBI special agents played audio intercepts of their pitch to AIPAC’s legal counsel and AIPAC promptly fired the pair to distance itself from activities it had long supported.
Rosen and Weisman were later indicted under the Espionage Act, although the case was later quashed under an intense Israel lobby pressure campaign shortly after President Obama entered office.
What exactly did AIPAC’s two officials tell the Washington Post in its unrelenting drive to gin up a U.S. war with Iran? A decade later, the U.S. Department of Justice doesn’t believe the American public is entitled to hear a tape long ago played to AIPAC’s lawyer Nathan Lewin, even as AIPAC continues to agitate for more wars. (MDR denial PDF)
7. Niger uranium forgery underwriters.
Although Ike may or may not have worried much about the implications of Operation Susannah, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee certainly did.
A secret memo touched off years of Senate and Justice Department investigations into Israel lobbying over fears that American operatives might engage in other overseas clandestine provocations aimed at duping the U.S. into ill-advised conflicts that would benefit Israel (the short memo references the Lavon affair twice). The Iraq war proves those fears were well-founded.
Many have long suspected that the Niger uranium forgeries, fake documents the Bush administration trumpeted to falsely accuse Iraq of buying uranium from Africa for nuclear weapons, were chartered by American neoconservatives in order to provide a pretext they desperately needed for war. Perhaps the FBI’s investigation into the matter definitively proves it.
However, despite years of requests for the 1,000 pages of that investigation, the FBI after initially duly proceeding with a FOIA, has now suddenly clammed up. (Niger uranium denial PDF)
8. Israel lobbyists embedded in the Treasury and Justice Departments.
Israel lobbying organizations have been very effective at embedding their operatives in key positions across the Federal government, such as Stuart Levey in the Treasury Department’s economic warfare unit, or former AIPAC director Tom Dine as a contractor at the floundering US government-funded Arabic-language broadcaster Alhurra.
It used to be possible to get a phone directory or conduct a comprehensive audit of which key political appointees (and the people they brought in) were running critical divisions of federal agencies by obtaining detailed Office of Personnel Management and other public records. Not anymore. (FOIA response PDF)
Leveraging heightened post-911 sensitivities, the US Treasury Department now claims the same protections against disclosure formerly enjoyed only by intelligence agency employees.
Since the 1940s, the U.S. Department of Justice has earned a reputation as a place where Israel lobby criminal investigations go to die. Justice is also where an AIPAC official like Neil Sher can while away a few years on pet projects at taxpayer expense before moving on to more lucrative outside work.
DOJ also routinely denies files about its past official decisions not to pursue criminal cases on the basis that doing so could jeopardize privacy, ongoing investigations, or factors underlying its coveted “prosecutorial discretion” (e.g. charging the disenfranchised but not powerful insiders for wrongdoing).
Like Treasury, it is now almost impossible to survey and produce an organization chart of the Israel lobby’s political appointees embedded at high and mid-level Justice Department posts or the biographies of the staff and contractors they bring in with them.
9. Unclassified IDA report about US charities funding the Israeli nuclear weapons program.
Sensitive reports need not be classified for the government to hang on to them indefinitely. In 1987 the Institute for Defense Analyses delivered an unclassified report to the Department of Defense titled “Critical Technology Issues in Israel.”
The study implicates the Israeli Weizmann Institute for Science and Technology in nuclear weapons research, raising deep questions about the group’s U.S. tax-exempt charitable fundraising and U.S. commitment to enforce the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
The Department of Defense withheld the IDA report from release on the basis of FOIA exemptions covering trade secrets and “intra-agency communications protected by the deliberative process privilege,” among others. (FOIA denial PDF)
10. Justification for NSA funneling raw intelligence on Americans to Israel.
If former NSA contractor Edward Snowden has taught Americans anything, it is that “unknown knowns” are usually even worse than many might have first imagined. Some careful observers knew about massive NSA surveillance, while others alerted the public about the danger of “backdoor” U.S. intelligence flows to Israel. But who ever suspected the NSA was shipping wholesale raw intercepts gathered on Americans to Israel under a secret deal struck in 2009?
No government that wholly denies such relevant information can claim legitimacy via consent of the governed. There can be little doubt why these ten files are kept closed: it serves the Israel lobby. The means by which this closure is sustained is also no secret. The millions of dollars that line politician’s pockets, promote media pundits and quietly spirit political appointees into key gatekeeper positions maintain closed files and prevent informed public debate.
Because of this, Americans should proceed assuming the worst conceivable, most logical explanation for any given U.S.-Israel “unknown known” is correct—until proven otherwise. Under this guideline, it is prudent to believe that LBJ—properly warned by his intelligence services and advisors that Israel was stealing the most precious military material on earth from America—was simply too marinated in Israel lobby campaign cash to faithfully uphold his oath of office.
It is similarly reasonable to believe the Justice Department and FBI won’t release Israeli spy files because Americans would finally understand that, despite massive ongoing harm to America, political appointees in the Justice Department thwart warranted prosecutions.
DOJ finds it much easier to stay “on message” through a long line of lobby-approved but mostly bogus “Islamic terrorism cases” (many made via sketchy undercover informants goading members of targeted minority communities into “terror” plots).
According to its own records, every time it tried to uphold the law in the 1940s the DOJ suddenly found itself internally and externally swarmed by Israel lobbyists with inexhaustible financial war chests and legal experts working to quash warranted prosecutions in secret coordination with Israel. The DOJ now likely believes it can never win against Israel lobby generated media and political agitation when it moves to prosecute, and has now simply given up.
It is logical to assume that Israel was found selling out America to the Soviets in Pollard’s case, since little else explains the unusually harsh impact of Weinberger’s secret memo. It is similarly likely that the FBI’s AIPAC wiretaps would, if released today, accurately reveal Rosen and Weissman to be what they actually were — unregistered foreign agents operating on behalf of and in ongoing contact with the Israeli government rather than legitimate domestic lobbyists.
It is similarly more productive to assume that at least one neoconservative operative with strong ties to the involved entities in Italy — such as Michael Ledeen — served as barker to the Italian sideshow that disseminated forged documents.
According to documents released by Edward Snowden, the transfer of raw NSA intercepts on American citizens to Israel was authorized under a secret doctrine that “the survival of the state of Israel is a paramount goal of US Middle East policy.”
This “prime directive” was probably a secret because it is a blank check obligating American blood and treasure to a cause American citizens never approved via advise and consent. But why did the Obama administration — even as it dismissed espionage charges against AIPAC staff in 2009 — so deeply betray American privacy?
Under “unknown known” doctrine, most would assume that like LBJ before him, Obama sold out America because his Israel lobby handlers secretly demanded and paid for it on behalf of a foreign country. What other goodies Obama doled out to Israel in exchange for help gaining the highest office remain to emerge.
The official process for obtaining official public disclosure of “uknown knowns” — the Freedom of Information Act — does not function when the stakes in disclosure are high and Israeli interests are involved.
Agencies (and ISCAP) correctly perceive government credibility is at stake when there is real openness, and that bona fide transparency would positively impact how government behaves. Visibly corrupt federal government officials and institutions are counting on continued secrecy to accumulate illegitimate power by undermining public accountability.
Abby Martin goes over five instances of misleading legislation, including bills like the Patriot Act and the Healthy Forest Initiative which do almost the opposite of what their ‘catchy titles’ imply.
McCain & Keating: Savings & Loan Scandal! A Must See
John McCain and closest friend Charles Keating connected to Saving & Loan scandal in which Americans lost their life savings!!!!