April 4, 2011
- Financial Martial Law
- Globalists—Through UN—Force U.S. Into Libyan War
- CIA Analyst Reveals Zionists' Role in Planning U.S. Invasion of Iraq
- Third War Front In Mideast Means Disaster for U.S.
- U.S. Military Adventurism Bankrupting America
- College Kid Schools TSA Screeners On His Search and Seizure Rights
- Internet Has All-Seeing Eye Focused On Students
- Obama Reneges On Transparency Promises
- Will Japan's Nuclear Disaster Require ‘Chernobyl Option'?
April 11, 2011
- 911 Survivor Won't Back Down
- Gruesome Photos Reveal Sadism Run Rampant
- Top D.C. Paper Pressured on Bilderberg Blackout
- ‘Creature' Author Schools America on Fed
- GOP's Fiscal Conservatives Want Welfare Expenditures Cut Back
- Ending Tax Breaks for Charitable Giving
- Another Serious Gulf Oil Spill Cover Up May Be Under Way
- New Book Says Zionists Ready to Start WW III
- Japan's Disaster At Power Plant Isn't Over Yet
- Israeli Worm A Threat to World's Nuclear Facilities
- U.S. Ignores Threat From China's Financial Terrorism
April 18, 2011
- Soros Convenes ‘Bretton Woods II'
- JIM TUCKER?S BILDERBERG ITINERARY 2011
- Democrats Caught Sabotaging Tea Party
- Fed ‘Data Dump' Reveals Billions in Foreign Bailouts
- 9-11 Fairy Tale Excuse for Endless War
- Trilateral Commission is Concerned Americans Are Catching On To Them
- EU Socialist-Style Economics Failing Across Europe
- Paul Grills Chairman of the Fed; Promises Action to Rein in Banks
- Obama's Goddesses of War & the Neo-Con Agenda
- Evidence Suggests Libyan Regel Leader Is CIA Asset
- CEO of Largest Corporation in U.S. Set to Head Obama Advisory Panel
- Secret Policy Bans U.S. Mention of Israeli Nukes
April 25, 2011
- AFP Crashes Globalist Confab
- ‘Hoot-Smawley,' FDR, Israel & Michele Bachmann
- Shadowy Group Employed to Predict Future
- Short Life Expectancy for BP Whistleblowers?
- While World Watches Libya, Israel Gets Offensive
- Air Travel Alert
- What Will Trump Find In Obama's Past?
In mid-March, Michigan lawmakers passed legislation that has been called "financial martial law." Contained within it are the methods and authority to remove elected officials and replace them with appointed "emergency financial managers" who, according to CBS News, would have the authority to "fire local elected officials, break contracts, seize and sell assets, eliminate services, and even eliminate whole cities or school districts without any public input."
The appointees selected by GOP
Gov. Rick Snyder would be "accountable" only to the
state legislature. The possible abuses are endless.
As online journalist Cory Doctorow reported on March 11, "This opens the door to the kind of ‘governance' we've seen in occupied Iraq where high-paid appointees who don't answer to the governed get to award no-bid contracts to their pals, with little or no oversight or control."
Like the vast governmental powers granted in the wake of Sept. 11, 2001, citizens have the responsibility to examine the potential for corruption in a law. Michigan's systematic dissolution of the people's authority in government is by no means without precedent.
In February 2009 Bloomberg reported on hidden healthcare components in the Democrat-backed federal stimulus bill. Based on the recommendations of disgraced Health and Human Services secretarial nominee Tom Daschle, in his book, "Critical: What We Can Do About The Health-Care Crisis," the stimulus bill created "an appointed body with vast powers to make the ‘tough' decisions elected politicians won't make."
Specifically, the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research "approves or rejects treatments using a formula that divides the cost of treatment by the number of years a patient is likely to benefit."
Again, this involves appointed individuals making decisions who are not elected by or accountable to the people. The stimulus bill became a law that same month. Lord John Acton wrote in 1887, "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."
Legislative examples such as the Michigan law and healthcare reform do indeed display this non-partisan desire for absolute power.
In 1776, a group of liberty-seeking men put ideas to paper
in the form of the Declaration of Independence. Presenting their
list of objections toward
colonial rule by King George III, they wrote, "The history
of the present king of Great Britain is a history of repeated
injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment
of an absolute tyranny over these states." As an example,
they defined George as a tyrant "for suspending our legislatures
and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for
us in all cases whatsoever."
Frank Whalen has been a radio talk show host for the past 17 years, and worked as a consultant for Maxim magazine. To read more from Frank Whalen or to tune in to his radio show, "Frankly Speaking," go to his uncensored website at www.franklyspeakingradio.com. There you will see a vast archive of information on a wide range of topics.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
The United States, under Bilderberg-Trilateral Commission orders, is now engaged in not two, but three wars in the Middle East where America has no legitimate national interest. But the world's entrenched international financiers do have a huge interest in war profits, purchased at the cost of soldiers' blood. These powerful globalists also perceive maverick rulers like Libya's Muammar Qadaffi as roadblocks in their push for establishing a world regime.
Before the U.S.
joined the invasion, Qadaffi sent a personal letter to President
Obama in which he reportedly told Obama that Islamic fundamentalists
tied to al Qaeda were the primary source of the ongoing political
troubles in North Africa—including Libya. Qadaffi challenged
Obama: "If you had found them taking over American cities
by the force of arms, tell me what you would do?"
This was no "crazy conspiracy theory" coming from the eccentric Libyan strongman alone. Even Secretary of Defense Robert Gates—among other high-level figures in the American military diplomatic intelligence community—raised concerns (like Qadaffi) about the possibility al Qaeda might be responsible for some of the unrest in Libya and/or that al Qaeda could benefit from the consequences of American intervention.
Qadaffi also sent terse notes to heads of state in France, Britain and to the UN secretary-general, also saying: "You never have the right to intervene in our internal affairs. Who gave you that right? Our country is not your country."
American non-interventionists—who honor the words of President George Washington who cautioned his countrymen not to become involved in the affairs of other nations—find wisdom in Qadaffi's words, even if they do not like his style of governing. If the United States intervened in every nation where dictators hold sway, Americans would have been at war with the Soviet Union, the People's Republic of China and virtually every nation in Africa, to name but a few.
And while warmongering elements within the pro Israel "neoconservative" network and their congressional allies such as Sens. John McCain (RAriz.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) were calling for U.S. military intervention in Libya, even the neoconservative Washington Times, which is fiercely anti-Qadaffi and eager for his ouster, admitted in a front page story that many top retired military leaders were quietly urging the Obama administration to avoid intervention in Libya.
While the globalists were manipulating the United States into war in Libya—which is looking increasingly like it is about to become a classic "quagmire" of the Vietnam-Afghanistan-Iraq mode—two-thirds of Americans among a broad cross section in several polls expressed opposition to the Afghanistan war. In addition, polls show that many Americans believe the U.S. cannot afford another war given the current state of the economic situation and joblessness in the United States.
Nevertheless, Bilderberg-Trilateral Commission power is so strong that these two pro world government groups were able to put America's fighting men and women into harm's way, and they did it by having the president seek guidance, not from Congress, but from the world's governmental body—the UN. As we go to press, the United States is raining bombs down on Libyan cities in another undeclared war.
AFP editor James P. Tucker Jr. is a veteran journalist who spent many years as a member of the "elite" media in Washington. Since 1975 he has won widespread recognition, here and abroad, for his pursuit of on-the-scene stories reporting the intrigues of global power blocs such as the Bilderberg Group. Tucker is the author of Jim Tucker's Bilderberg Diary: One Man's 25-Year Battle to Shine the Light on the World Shadow Government. Bound in an attractive full-color softcover and containing 272 pages—loaded with photos, many never published before—the book recounts Tucker's experiences over the last quarter century at Bilderberg meetings. $25 from AFP. No charge for S&H in U.S.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
According to a retired CIA analyst, new evidence has emerged revealing the full extent to which Israel was involved in the direct planning of America's aggressive war on Iraq that was initiated by President George W. Bush after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington.
During a March 10 interview, former
27-year CIA intelligence analyst Ray McGovern broke some news
with AFP concerning former Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz.
This information on the extent of Wolfowitz's war making agenda
was derived, McGovern said, from "an unimpeachable source."
McGovern began, "Enough distance has been created between Wolfowitz and our government that I feel free to tell this story. Since Wolfowitz was largely responsible for the Iraqi invasion, his father wrote him a note that said: ‘Paul, I'm an ardent Zionist, but first and foremost, I'm an American. What you have done for the Zionist cause is beyond the pale, and you should be ashamed of yourself.' "
The war happened, explained McGovern, because "son Paul put Israel before the interests of the United States."
McGovern continued, "That's why I say, particularly in the lead up to the invasion of Iraq, the so-called neo-conservatives—Richard Perle, Wolfowitz, [Douglas] Feith, the whole coterie of folks who were running our policy at that time—they had great difficulty distinguishing between what they considered to be the strategic interests of Israel on the one hand, and the strategic interests of the United States on the other. They tend to see them as identical, and they're not."
He next addressed the ramifications of these decisions. "When you look at the hatred that our policies in the Middle East have caused among 1.3 billion Muslims in the world, and when you see that a lot of their behavior is conditioned by our being joined at the hip with Israeli policy, however violent, then you can see what damage this is doing to the interests of the United States."
In separate interviews with The Washington Post and MSNBC, along with testimony to a congressional committee, McGovern used the term "O.I.L." to explain why the U.S went to war with Iraq: oil, Israel and logistics. War was waged, he believes, so the U.S. and Israel could dominate that part of the world. Moreover, Israel was intimately involved with war planning.
"Was Israel part of the calculation? We have empirical evidence now. Before it was largely analysis," McGovern explained.
The evidence he's referring to is from former Prime Minister Tony Blair testifying before the Chilcot Inquiry earlier this year. Blair admitted that while he and Bush were scheming about Iraq in April 2002 at Bush's ranch in Crawford, Texas near Waco, they were in constant communication with the Israelis.
As expected, McGovern's appearance before Congress created controversy. "Within three hours of my testimony, prominent congresspersons from New York issued a collective statement calling me anti-Semitic because I said Israel and the United States wanted to dominate that part of the world."
Unshaken by these attacks, McGovern struck a defiant tone. "If I say Israel is a major factor in our country's decision to initiate a war of aggression, that is fact supported by evidence. People should not shy away from that."
AFP next asked if he thought the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) has too much influence on Congress.
McGovern was no-nonsense in his reply: "They should be registered as an agent of a foreign power; it's pure and simple. I don't know how they escaped that, but those are the rules."
He continued, "Even when their minions are caught spying on us, purloining classified information and giving it to the Israeli Embassy, they get off, and they're not brought to trial, whereas Bradley Manning, the presumed WikiLeaks leaker, is in solitary confinement for 10 months now at the Marine brig in Quantico, Va."
McGovern summed up Israel's malignant influence with some tongue-in-cheek humor: "There's a vicious joke that goes like this: Somebody wanted Israel to consider becoming America's 51st state. The answer came back: No, the Israelis are not interested, because then they would only have two senators."
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
President Obama, with his March 19 order to fire more than 100 cruise missiles at the sovereign country of Libya, has involved the United States in another needless, no-win war. At a time when joblessness and the national debt are at historic highs, this makes three wars that the United States is openly fighting—not including the unknown number of secret wars we are engaged in across Africa, the Middle East and Asia.
How much is all of this costing us American taxpayers—you know, the people who pay the bills and bleed in all of these wars? On page 9 in this week's issue, former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Paul Craig Roberts estimates the U.S. military security apparatus costs us $1.2 trillion every year. That doesn't even include Obama's latest military action.
When we start tallying the price tag for Libya with all the cruise missiles, at $1 million apiece, the stealth bomber flights, which cost $10,000 an hour to operate, the Navy warships—the American people are looking at hundreds of millions of dollars just for the first three days of this conflict.
Obama called for this attack without even bothering to consult Congress, in spite of the fact that legislators, who happened to be on vacation while U.S. bombs were falling on Libyan cities, likely would have rubber-stamped it anyway. Instead, Obama, while on a free trade promotion junket in Central and South America, turned to another "congress" for guidance: the United Nations Security Council.
In truth, Obama's bloody intervention could not have come at a worse time for America. As bad as the economic situation is, Middle East media outlets were reporting on even more horrifying news: 4,000 photographs were recently leaked to a German publication that showed, among other things, American GIs in Afghanistan taking trophy shots with civilians whom they had just murdered.
But don't count on the U.S. mainstream media to tell us about this or to question the sanity of starting yet another war. Their job is to cheerlead for the military-industrial-banking complex and to help silence the real truthtellers—people like Bradley Manning, the 23-year-old American soldier who is rotting in a military brig for disclosing nasty little truths about the U.S. empire, whether Americans want to hear about them or not.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
The $3 trillion cost of the Iraq war, as computed by economist Joseph Stiglitz and Analyst Linda Bilmes, is 20 percent of the size of the U.S. economy in 2010. In other words, the Iraq war alone cost Americans one-fifth of the year's gross domestic product.
Instead of investing such resources to produce income, jobs, growth and solvency for state and local governments, the U.S. government wasted the equivalent of 20 percent of the economy's production in 2010 in destroying infrastructure and people in foreign lands. The U.S. government spent a huge sum of money committing war crimes, while millions of Americans were thrown out of their jobs and out of their homes.
Indeed, the American empire is failing. A number of its puppet rulers are being overthrown by popular protests, and the almighty dollar will not even buy one Swiss franc, one Canadian dollar or an Australian dollar. Despite the sovereign debt that threatens EU members Greece, Ireland, Spain and Portugal, it requires $1.38 to buy one euro, a new currency that was issued at parity with the U.S. dollar.
Also, the military-security complex is more powerful than ever, showing no inclination to halt U.S. hegemonic wars.
The U.S. media, as a good government servant, only report the out-of-pocket cost of the wars - about one-third of the real cost. Their current cost figures omit the cost of Life-long care for soldiers wounded and maimed, the cost of military pensions, the replacement cost of destroyed equipment etc.
The true cost of America's illegal Iraq invasion, based entirely on deceptions, is at least $3,000 billion. And if the ongoing Afghan war lasts as long as the Pentagon says it needs to, its cost will be a multiple of the Iraq war's cost.
As long as the $1.2 trillion annual budget for the military-security complex is off limits, nothing can be done about the U.S. Budget deficit except to renege on obligations to the elderly, confiscate private assets of print lots of money in an attempt to inflate away the debts. With an interest-bearing money-creation system, that seem like a bad idea.
The off-shoring of production for U.S. markets has enriched corporate management, large shareholders, and Wall Street, but it has eroded the tax collections of local, state and federal governments, halted the growth of real income for everyone but the rich, and disrupted the lives of those Americans whose jobs were sent abroad. When short-term and long-term discouraged workers are added to the U3 measure of unemployment, the U.S. has a real unemployment rate of 22 percent. A country with nearly one-forth of its workforce unemployed has a shrunken tax base and feeble consumer purchasing power.
All this is leading to the destruction of Social Security and Medicare.
Republicans have convinced a large percentage of voters that America is in trouble, not because it wastes 20 percent of the annual budget on wars of aggression and Homeland Security porn-scanners at airports, but because of "the poor and retirees."
Pundits scapegoat the middle class along with the poor and retirees. The nerdy CFR boy, commentator Fareed Zakaria, sees no extravagance in a trillion-dollar military budget. The real money, he says, is in middle class programs.
Republicans tell us that our grandchildren are being saddled with impossible debt because of handouts to retirees and the poor, but $3 trillion wars are "necessary" and have nothing to do with the public debt's growth.
When a republican sneers "entitlement," he or she is referring to social Security and Medicare, for which people have paid 15 percent of their wages for their working lives. Most Republicans see Social Security and Medicare as undeserved welfare payments to people who over-consumed and did not save for their old age. Republicans contend that America can be strong again once we get rid of these welfare leeches. Then, we can really fight wars. And show people who is boss.
The U.S. government does not represent the American people.
It represents the oligarches. The way campaign finance and elections
are structured, the American people cannot reclaim their government
by voting. Americans have been reduced to serfdom.
|Top|
While 21-year-old Aaron Tobey was home from college during
Christmas in Virginia, his grandfather passed away in
Wisconsin, and he had to catch a quick flight to the funeral.
Aware of the Choices awaiting him at the Richmond airport's security
gate, he'd already decided to not only "opt out" of
the hazardous body scan, but actually prepared himself for the
physical patdown with an educational message to the Transportation
Security Administration (TSA) grapplers. The message, handwritten
on his chest, was an abbreviated version of the Constitution's
fourth Amendment.
Under TSA's enhanced secondary screening policy, passengers must submit to either an Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) scan (which not only produces a detailed picture of the passenger's private parts buy subjects him to a dosage of radiation), or to a humiliating patdown.
Tobey, a University of Cincinnati student, objected to both of these invasions of his privacy and expressed his feeling by removing his shoes and instructed along with his sweat pants and shirt. Then he stood in his socks and athletic shorts with the message across his chest and stomach announcing, "Amendment 4: The right of the people to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated."
The officers' reaction to Tobey's exploits now has them, Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano and the Airport Commission facing a $250,000 federal lawsuit for abuse of his rights by holding him on a charge of disorderly conduct.
Tobey claims in his 30-page lawsuit filed on March 10, 2011 that he was detained the next 90 minutes, cuffed with his hands behind his back and taken to the airport police station where he was intimidated and held against his will.
According to the suit, during the interrogation, the authorities wanted to know "about his affiliation with, or knowledge of, any terrorist organizations, if he had been asked to do what he did by any third party, and what his intentions and goals were."
The suit also alleges that the TSA officers attempted to "defame the name and good reputation" of young Tobey by contacting the Concinnati police with the suggestion that they contact the University's dean of Students wth the information of his arrest.
Unable to come up with any real crimes, the police finally charged Tobey with disorderly conduct, a misdemeanor, claiming that he created a disturbance with the other passengers. However, Tobey says that he "never observed any visible agitation among or disruption of the other passengers during any of the separate screening procedures and/or while in custody."
Indeed, it is more likely than any passerby would have been entertained, amused and supportive.
The federal lawsuit alleges that the plaintiff's nonviolent
protest in no way violated any TSA regulations. This concept
seems to have been upheld, since country prosecutors dropped
the charges two weeks later.
|Top|
Technology today has handed the plutocracy an "all-seeing eye" to scan ever-widening swathes of society. This time, the White House has partnered with Facebook to oversee the social media activities of students - especially outside the classroom.
Under the guise of anti-bullying policy, "safe school czar" Kevin Jennings launched a campaign that ups the ante for government intrusion.
Neil Munro of The Daily Caller described this offensive in a March 16 column: "Education Department officials are threatening school principals with lawsuits if they fail to monitor and curb students' lunchtime chat and evening Facebook time."
Facebook's CEO Mark Zuckerberg is the perfect candidate to create this online snitch culture that violates the most elementary First amendment rights.
On April 28, 2010 the New York Times' Nick Bilton asked a Facebook employee how Zuckerberg felt about privacy. His response: "He doesn't believe in it."
Wired's Eliot van Buskirk reacted the same day to this comment: "Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg appears to have been outed as not caring one whit about your privacy - a jarring admission considering how much of our personal data Facebook owns."
Another troubling aspect of this program is that Jennings, who spearheads the Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network, also published six books on the subject of gay rights and education. A male high school sophomore confided in Jennings that an older male pedophile had engaged in sexual relations with him. Rather than reporting this obvious case of statutory rape, Jennings told the 15-year-old, "I hope you know to use a condom."
Is Jennings - a debased sexual opportunist - the type of man parents want analyzing every message sent by their children on Facebook?
President Obama has fully embraced this ominous 1984 environment, as indicated by a recent meeting in San Francisco on Feb. 16 with Zuckerberg, Apple CEO Steve Jobs and Google CEO Eric Schmidt.
Interestingly, following an Aug. 14, 2010 interview with Google's Schmidt, Holman Jenkins of The Wall Street Journal reported, "He [Schidt] predicts that every young person one day will be entitled automatically to change his or her name upon reaching adulthood in order to disown youthful hi-jinks stored on their friends' social media sites."
So, not only could search engines have access to a teenager's most private messages, but so could the government and Facebook.
Schmidt summarizes the power these techno-cabals hold within the deep recesses of their computer memory banks.
"I don't believe society understands what happens when everything is available, knowable and recorded all the time," said Schmidt.
However, as a reflection of his omnipotence, Schmidt bragged,"I actually think most people don't want Google to answer their questions. They want Google to tell them what they should be doing next."
If our children are indoctrinated into accepting the surrender of their privacy rights to the likes of Jennings and his Department of Education, a dystopian state depicted in science fiction novels will rapidly become a starting reality.
Or maybe it already has.
|Top|
Back when Sen. Barack Obama became
the democratic nominee for president, he introduced new legislation
to "expand public access to information about government
spending" through what is known as the Strengthening transparency
and accountability in federal Spending Act of 2008. To win votes,
he said on the Senate floor: "People from every state in
this great nation sent us to Congress to defend their rights
and stand up for their interests. To do that we have to tear
down the barriers that separate citizens from the democratic
process and to shine a brighter light on the inner workings of
Washington.
Obama also promised in the spirit of openness, "The public will have five days to look at every bill that lands on my desk."
When he took office, Obama vowed, "Transparency promotes accountability and provides information for citizens about what their government is doing.
As recently as March 16, 2011 Obama issued a proclamation celebrating "Sunshine Week" and hailed himself and his administration as "the most open and transparent ever." But just moments before Obama was to be presented with the Sunshine award, the ceremony was called off by the White House.
That very day Obama threatened to veto legislation designed to prevent the Freedom of Information act (FOIA) from becoming a farce through "exemption creep" by requiring exemptions to be "clear and unambiguous." One of the ambiguous exemptions is known as the "deliberative process," which lets the government withhold records that describe its decision-making behind the scenes. During the first nine months of Obama's presidency major agencies cited this one exemption at least 70,779 times during the 2009 budget year - well above the 47,395 times it was used during President George W. Bush's final full budget year.
The DIA and securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) rejected information requests more than half the time during fiscal 2010. When they complied at all, the DIA took more than three months, and the SEC averaged 553 days to reply to each request. The SEC can now legally hide Wall Street scams 100 percent of the time from the people, because the new financial regulation which Obama recently signed into law exempts it from public disclosure.
President Obama told the American people, "One of the corner stones of the sweeping new legislation was more transparent financial markets." In fact, in touting the new law, Obama explicitly said it would "increase transparency in financial dealings."
Obama's backroom deal was cut between Congress and the SEC to keep the Sec's failures secret. "I allows the SEC to block the public's access to virtually all SEC records," said Gary Aguirre, a former SEC staff attorney turned whistle blower who had accused the agency of thwarting a hedge fund investigation.
But the "most open and transparent ever" administration wages war against whistle blowers like Aguirre. In 40 years the government has only attempted to bring charges against a handful of "info-leakers," but in less than two years Obama's Justice department has filed criminal charges against five individuals - and is plotting legal assaults against others - including WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.
Obama agressively uses his power to crack down on federal employees who leak information to expose government wrongdoing - he kills their careers. For example, Catherine Papoi was the deputy unit chief for the Department of Homeland Security's office that processed FOIA requests. She told the DHS inspector general that Obama's political appointees were improperly interfering with the agency's FOIA response process, including those submitted by journalists and members of congress. Soon, Papoi was unemployed.
"It is not to me a good sign when government chooses to go after leakers using the full force of criminal law when there are other ways to handle these situations," Jan Kirtley, a University of Minnesota law professor and former executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, told Politico.
There are countless secrets the government hides.
Remember when Obama hid the size of the gulf of Mexico oil spill as only "5,000 barrels a day" to lessen BP's lawsuit damages and fines?
Remember when Obama was "outraged" because Scotland released the alleged Lockerbie bomber on compassionate grounds to Libya? The British government was outraged because Obama earlier had approved the UK to let him go, so they released the proof to the British press. It caused quite a scandal in Britain - but our "free, watchdog" establishment press didn't bark - or even whistle.
Then the Obama administration hid $60 billion worth of fighter jets and attack helicopters in a Saudi arms deal they tried to slip past Congress - and the American people.
So it's no wonder that "the Obama administration even censored 194 pages of internal e-mails about its Open Government Directive that the AP requested more than one year ago," as the Associated Press itself reported.
The Center for Journalism sums it up nicely: "The president who campaigned for more ‘open government' and ‘full disclosure' will not unseal his medical records, his school records, his birth records or his passport records. He will not release his Harvard records, his Columbia college records or his Occidental College records - he will not even release his Columbia college thesis. All his legislative records from the Illinois state senate are missing. In addition, no one can find his school records for the elite K-12 college prep school he attended in Hawaii."
While stumping in 2007, then-Sen. Barack Obama said, "the president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation."
Just recently, America's Nobel Peace Prize president ordered a U.S. tomahawk missile assault on Libya - a brutal unconstitutional attack without a congressional declaration of war. Within hours of receiving a flimsy pretext from the UN Security Council, which replaced the U.S. Congress, the administration rained 112 cruise missiles down upon coastal targets to "wage peace and mercy" on the Libyan people.
In announcing the mission during a visit to Brazil, Obama said he was "reluctant to resort to force but was convinced it was necessary to save the lives of civilians."
"We cannot stand idly by when a tyrant tells his people there will be no mercy," he said in Brasilia, Chicago Sun Times noted, evidently unaware that cruise missiles can be rather merciless themselves and there is no telling how many will die.
"The president reiterated that he would no send American
ground troops to Libya," the Sun Times reported.
Do you believe him?
|Top|
As AFP goes to press, the crisis at Japan's Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear power station is still at a critical level. Explosions and fires have compromised all four primary reactors, while the U.S. Nuclear regulatory Commission (NRC) announced that the No. 4 complex suffered a crippling breach in a wall or floor, therefore not allowing exposed fuel rods to be cooled by water.
Such an obstacle is monumental, as Reactor 4 stores 11,125 spent fuel rod assemblies that are emitting deadly levels of radiation. NRC chairman Gregory Jaczko observed, "We believe that secondary containment has been destroyed and there is no water in the spent fuel pool. We believe radiation levels are extremely high."
As a cosmetic gesture, military helicopters dumped buckets of seawater on the overheated reactors. However, this move is comparable to squirting eyedroppers full of liquid an a raging forest fire.
Closer to home, Americans should be wary for one specific reason. During the past decade, the Japanese have procrastinated on how to dispose of their radioactive fuel rods. In the United states we, too, simply house our depleted waste in large storage pools located at various nuclear power plants. The catastrophe befalling exposed uranium rods at Fukushima's No. 4 reactor could certainly be replayed stateside, though the Japanese situation was brought on by a tsunami that followed an earthquake - a combination not so probable in the United States.
As these dangers persisted, the Navy removed two rescue vessels from the Japanese coastline. Furthermore, the White House and Japanese authorities urged citizens to remain outside a 50-mile radius of the power plant, in addition to initiating an evacuation of any American citizens wanting to leave Japan. During a March 13 interview, Jenny Lake, who has researched this industry for years, told AFP, "We've never seen explosions at a nuclear reactor caught before on film. Every action taken so far at Fukushima implies a major nuclear accident. The reactor cores have obviously been breached."
She also wrote that same day, that in her view, "Nuclear fallout is a cumulative poison based on the complicated chemistry of reactor products and the terms of ‘half-life.'"
Ms. Lake next addressed the Three Mile Island meltdown near Harrisburg, Pa.
"Following this incident, animals such as goats, sheep and cows laid down in fields and died," she said. "People who couldn't escape the aftermath later suffered an array of severe side effects."
She continued, "The world has experienced chronic problems with nuclear reactors. France had 800 radiation releases last year alone. Fukushima is an aging facility that has been plagued by repeated pumping problems in the past. There's no such thing as a clean nuclear power plant."
Ms. Lake's assessments are correct, for Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) has been cited with hiding safety problems at Fukushima for nearly a decade. Their ongoing cover-up and contradictory press releases are comparable to BP's less-than-honest reports last year following the gulf oil spill.
Ms. Lake pointed out: "Nuclear plants are increasingly becoming older, and they've overreached their lifespan usage. Most weren't intended to last beyond 25 years without major renovations or reconstruction. A 7.0 earthquake in California would devastate their nuclear plants."
On March 17, David Lochbaum, director of the Nuclear Safety Program of the Union of Concerned scientists, stated in a press briefing, "The NRC reported 14 near-misses at reactors last year. If there is a common theme among last year's near-misses, it's that none would have happened had prior warning flags been heeded rather than discounted or ignored."
Ms. Lake reiterated the potential for disaster, due to both human error and natural disaster.
"U.S. plants built in the 1970s have overshot their lifetime use by decades," she said. "There isn't one American plant that hasn't been shut down for at least a short amount of time due to bad track records. To compound matters, there have been plenty of cover-ups."
In Japan, radiation has seeped into Tokyo's tap water 140
miles away, and it appears desperate measures may be taken that
resemble what occurred after the full-blown Chernobyl meltdown
in Russia. Engineers are considering entombing the Fukushima
rectors in an encasement of cand and concrete. Burying these
toxic structures has become known as the"Chernobyl Option."
|Top|
Perhaps the most compelling direct testimony regarding the harrowing events of Sept. 11, 2001 comes from survivor and former Army Spec. April Gallop, who—with her two-month-old child, Elisha, in tow—arrived at the Pentagon just minutes before a powerful explosion rocked the building that Tuesday morning. Ms. Gallop spoke out on her experience at conferences where this AFP writer heard her story—which has never wavered.
Ms. Gallop wants justice. So, in coordination with the Center for 911 Justice, she filed a federal lawsuit and is staying the course, whatever the odds. The defendants are former Vice President Dick Cheney, former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, and Gen. Richard Myers (USAF, retired), former acting Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman.
Transportation Secretary and eyewitness Norman Mineta testified to the now disbanded 911 Commission that Cheney, on duty during the attacks, urgently spoke of an approaching hostile attack against the Pentagon but, incredibly, ordered a military stand down. Since the World Trade Center in Manhattan had already been hit, Ms. Gallop continues to ask why neither air defenses nor alarm warnings were implemented in and around the Pentagon.
The moment she turned on her work computer on Sept. 11, 2001, a powerful blast knocked her unconscious. Injured, she soon awoke with debris on her, even while reaching around and pulling her child, also injured, who survived, from the debris pile.
When Ms. Gallop exited the building through the hole made by the explosion, she saw no sign of plane wreckage. Yet the world is still told 10 years later that American Airlines Flight 77 rammed into history's most sophisticated command center without any attempted interception and vaporized, which various researchers say is absurd.
Ms. Gallop also maintains that federal officials repeatedly preached to her that a large commercial airliner hit the Pentagon and that she was strongly advised not to state otherwise.
"I could have very early given up," Ms. Gallop told AFP March 29. "My efforts are much larger than many people think they are." She now is fighting to obtain subpoena power, with the help of attorney William Veale and support through Centerfor911Justice.org.
Talking with AFP, she asked: "Do we want certain people in a position where they cannot ever be brought to justice?"
Federal District Judge Denny Chin dismissed Ms. Gallop's lawsuit in a lower court, claiming that the complaint was based on "cynical delusion and fantasy." But Ms. Gallop won't buckle. Her appeal, as AFP went to press, was slated to go before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit on April 5 in New Haven, Conn. She is citing a "violation of civil rights, conspiracy and other wrongs," the complaint states.
"This case . . . is premised on an allegation of broad complicity in the attack on the part of key U.S. government officials," the complainant said.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
Coalition forces in Afghanistan fear that gruesome pictures showing American troops posing with the corpses of murdered and mutilated Afghan civilians may provoke a more devastating backlash than graphic photographs taken of U.S. troops abusing prisoners in the notorious Iraqi prison Abu Ghraib.
In one of three photographs recently published in an edition of Germany's Der Spiegel magazine, Army Cpl. Jeremy Morlock is pictured smiling as he poses near the body of a dead young victim whose head is yanked back as if he were a hunting trophy.
Der Spiegel claims to have nearly 4,000 similar photographs and videos. The vast majority of the photos remain under lock and key, but some have leaked out on the Internet. These items are said to be part of a collection that members of a self-described American "kill team" compiled while deployed in northern Afghanistan's Kandahar province early last year.
Twelve soldiers are currently standing trial in the U.S. on various charges connected to the slaying of unarmed Afghans that occurred in that region between January and May 2010. Five of the soldiers are accused of premeditated murder. They allegedly engaged in "sport killings" and then attempted to cover up their crimes by staging combat situations to appear as though they had been provoked.
The other seven have been accused of collecting the body parts of dismembered victims, abusing drugs and attacking a fellow soldier who blew the whistle.
Morlock has already reached a plea agreement with prosecutors and could serve a maximum prison term of 24 years in exchange for cooperation in testifying against his codefendants.
In typical fashion, the U.S. government has distanced itself from the atrocities and laid the blame solely at the feet of the young men it trained to kill. The photographs depict "actions repugnant to us as human beings and contrary to the standards and values of the United States Army," said Army Col. Thomas Collins in an official statement from the Pentagon. "We apologize for the distress these photos cause."
That statement is hauntingly reminiscent of many others issued by the United States in the wake of similar tragedies. Following the Abu Ghraib scandal, then- Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld offered an almost identical apology when he appeared before the Senate Armed Services Committee on May 7, 2004, saying, "To those Iraqis who were mistreated by members of the U.S. armed forces, I offer my deepest apology. It was inconsistent with the values of our nation, it was inconsistent with the teachings of the military to the men and women of the armed forces, and it was certainly fundamentally unAmerican."
Contrary to the claims made in these statements, such brutalities seem quite consistent with the manner in which some American troops conduct themselves in the foreign countries where they've been deployed. Aside from these latest incidents in Afghanistan and the well-known atrocities carried out at Abu Ghraib—where prisoners were physically, psychologically and sexually tortured by American captors—several other callous acts have been documented in recent years, suggesting that a sadistic culture of violence is epidemic within the ranks of our armed service personnel.
In 2007, U.S. soldiers aboard an Apache helicopter repeatedly opened fire on a group of unarmed civilians in Baghdad, leaving two men dead and several others severely injured, including two children. Leaked footage of the killings contained audio where the soldiers can be heard celebrating the deaths and laughing as a Bradley fighting vehicle runs over one of the dead Iraqis. Then, in 2008, a Marine on patrol in Iraq was videotaped throwing a puppy over a cliff while being cheered on by a fellow Marine. That Marine, Lance Cpl. David Motari, has since been kicked out of the military.
What is particularly disturbing about these acts is that they are not just carried out by one disturbed individual, but by groups of them who all seem to share the same sadism. This contradicts U.S. claims that these are "isolated" incidents carried out by "rogue" elements. The only reason they appear isolated is because they have been made notorious by the video, audio and photographic evidence that happens to have exposed them. Meanwhile, thousands more civilian deaths go unexplained.
In Afghanistan, in excess of 2,700 civilians were killed in 2010. Many of these casualties can be blamed on the ruthless policies carried out under the direction of our top military brass.
One of the most vicious and despised tactics currently employed by the U.S. consists of "night raids"— military operations by U.S. troops, who break into civilian homes in the dead of night to look for weapons and suspects. It is an affront to local cultures and more unpopular than air strikes.
With this callous disregard for human rights, is it any wonder our soldiers mimic this same attitude? Though the U.S. continues to fear-monger about the possible repercussions that these "kill team" photographs may spark, it's not likely to manifest itself inside Afghanistan. Those people don't need photographs to remind them of the daily horrors that American occupation brings. They see these things with their own eyes, and the indelible image they imprint on their minds leaves a far more lasting impression than any film.
Keith Johnson is an independent journalist and the editor of "Revolt of the Plebs," an alternative news website that can be found at RevoltofthePlebs.com. He is the author of numerous articles and essays, all of which can be found on his blog, RevoltofthePlebs.wordpress.com
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003April
5, 2011
|Top|
Long ago, I called Jimmy Lee Hoagland, associate editor of The Washington Post and inquired about the Bilderberg group and the Trilateral Commission (TC). Because he had attended these meetings for many years, I explained, I wanted him to tell me when and where for both. His response on Dec. 16, 2010: "Unfortunately, I can't help. I am not in the Trilateral or Bilderberg loops these days."
I believe Jimmy Lee was lying. Even if sudden guilt feelings gripped him, he has attended these meetings for many years. He escorts the Post publisher, who has attended each meeting since 1954. So Hoagland certainly would know the "whens" and "wheres." Both groups always, at their farewell Monday morning breakfast, celebrate when and where they will meet next. And they always get the anticipated reminder letter in January or February so they can pencil in their next meeting dates.
Now, the new ombudsman of the Post, Patrick B. Pexton, seems
to be innocent. He assumed the role only in March of this year
and came from smaller newspapers. So I called and emailed him
(202-334-7582;
his email, ombudsman@washpost.com) this entire article on March
25.
"You are off to a good start," I wrote to Pexton.
"Your column denouncing the plagiarism of Post columnist
Sari Horwitz, a three-time
Pulitzer winner, is commendable. But your biggest expose is an
easy walk from your desk. Just walk into the offices of Jimmy
Lee Hoagland, associate editor, and Donald Graham, chairman of
the board.
"Ask them about the annual closed meetings of Bilderberg and the Trilateral Commission they always attend. These are groups of international financiers and political leaders from Europe and North America. They have an interlocking leadership (Rockefellers, Rothschilds) and a common agenda. High officials, including heads of state, attend from Europe. A high official of the White House and the secretaries of State, Treasury, Defense and the chairman of the Federal Reserve, among other luminaries, always attend."
I continued in my letter: "Bilderberg has tried, since its inception in 1954, to maintain absolute secrecy, to keep its very existence secret. Bilderberg wants nobody to know that it will meet June 9-12 in Saint Moritz, Switzerland. About 120 will attend Bilderberg. Armed guards will seal off their hotel, and nobody unconnected to Bilderberg will be allowed in.
"The Trilateral Commission, with about 300 participants, will be less obtrusive when it meets in Washington, D.C., April 8 to April 10. TC will seal off two floors with security keeping all others out. Both groups worked together to get the United States into a war with Libya and to promote global taxes and oil price increases, among other things.
"Now when you visit, Hoagland and Graham will be shocked that you know about these groups and will sputter that they are all good people doing wonderful things and should not be publicized. Ask the same question I have asked apologists for 30 years: If 120 film stars, or 120 professional football players, were meeting behind closed doors and armed guards for three days, you would bust your butt trying to learn and report on what transpired. Why, then, no curiosity when 120 or 300 of the world's most powerful men meet secretly?"
I concluded, "Also explain that these meetings are criminal because the Logan Act prohibits public officials from holding closed meetings with private citizens to plot public policy. When they mutter that the Logan Act passed in 1799, there are two answers. Unless repealed, it remains the law of the land. And it has been updated and expanded several times, including in the 20th century. Have fun."
I simply signed it, Jim Tucker, AMERICAN FREE PRESS.
AFP editor James P. Tucker Jr. is a veteran journalist who spent many years as a member of the "elite" media in Washington. Since 1975 he has won widespread recognition, here and abroad, for his pursuit of on-the-scene stories reporting the intrigues of global power blocs such as the Bilderberg Group. Tucker is the author of Jim Tucker's Bilderberg Diary: One Man's 25-Year Battle to Shine the Light on the World Shadow Government. Bound in an attractive full-color softcover and containing 272 pages—loaded with photos, many never published before—the book recounts Tucker's experiences over the last quarter century at Bilderberg meetings. $25 from AFP. No charge for S&H in U.S.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
When Fox News commentator Glenn Beck had author G. Edward Griffin as his TV guest on March 25, millions of Americans saw and heard a scathing, hour-long report that contained not one good and encouraging thing about the Federal Reserve System. But the question is: Why expose the crimes now that have been protected for a century? Moreover, why would "the system" use its decidedly phony conservative shill, Beck, to suddenly expose the fraud in the banking system by interviewing one whose truth-telling has been ignored and avoided by the mainstream media for decades? Is the Fed finally about to become history?
The money powers will never surrender voluntarily, and the only apparent motive (from their perspective) for dismantling America's current central bank, the Fed, would be to replace it with a similar system with the same owners, under another name, issuing a new currency for the world.
Since the death of Eustace Mullins, premier critic of the Fed, Griffin—author of The Creature from Jekyll Island—has achieved the unofficial status as the "elder statesman of the monetary realists." He and Beck gave a seminar on the deceptive history of the Fed dating to its secret founding by the financial elite at Jekyll Island, Ga.
Never disagreeing on anything, particularly the century-long sham this act perpetrated on the American people, Griffin and Beck pointed out that following a few failed attempts under various disguises, the Federal Reserve Act was finally passed on Dec. 23, 1913, mainly through the efforts of Virginia Rep. Carter Glass, a puppet of the bankers.
When asked about the high level of secrecy surrounding the Jekyll Island, 1910 meeting (to which such recognizable faces as Sen. Nelson Aldrich, a Rockefeller in-law, and banker J.P. Morgan traveled under false names), Griffin explained that the public was prevented from knowing that the so-called solution was being supplied by "these same guys" who had created the nation's financial problems in the first place.
When the first Federal Reserve bank was established in 1914,
the people were assured that there would always be enough gold
in the treasury to redeem whatever notes were put into circulation,
but it was a lie. There was never more than 40 percent on hand,
and the percentage dwindled from there to what Griffin says is
now nothing. The gold has disappeared.
He told Beck emphatically: "There's no gold in Fort Knox.
If they had it, they would show it."
Griffin referred to the Fed as a "ponzi scheme" that can work only as long as they keep expanding the money supply, adding, "Lying is all they know how to do. [Fed Chairman] Ben Bernanke says, ‘We're not printing money, we're digitizing it,'" Griffin added, with a what's the difference look on his face.
According to Griffin, the 2 percent to 3 percent published inflation rate is another lie, and the real rate is more like 20 percent, because, he reasoned, gold has always been the yardstick, and that 20 percent is its rate of increase in paper "dollar" cost.
In late March, the privately owned and controlled Federal Reserve was forced to disgorge tens of thousands of pages of documents detailing secret loans that were made to financial institutions. The disclosure came as a result of a Supreme Court ruling in a case brought by two reporters for the New York based Bloomberg News. Early reports indicate that foreign banks were some of the biggest beneficiaries of the U.S. central bank's easy money policy, showing that the Fed was not only busy bailing out American bankers, but also foreign bankers such as the Royal Bank of Scotland, Germany's Commerzbank and France's Societe Generale. As AFP continues to pore over the document dump, look for a detailed story in the April 18 edition.
Suggested reading: For more on the manipulation of America's money throughout U.S. history, we recommend Out of Debt; Out of Danger by Rep. Jerry Voorhis (DCa.). Softcover, 234 pages, $20 plus $3 S&H from AFP, 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, #100, Washington, D.C. 20003. Call toll free 1-888-699-6397 to charge.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
House Republicans have set for themselves an ambitious agenda as far as reining in the spending free-for-all plaguing Washington for the past three decades. This involves radical changes to the country's welfare system, bringing it back to 2007 levels. Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), the chairman of the conservative Republican Study Committee and the sponsor of the measure contends that this is necessary to endure the fiscal solvency of the United States.
Welfare spending has increased by 40 percent since the collapse of the U.S. economy in the summer of 2007 levels, which amounted to about $400 billion. That would take $300 billion out of the U.S. budget if legislators can pull it off.
Welfare today is a boondoggle. In many cases, administrative cost are high for federal social services programs. For example, 17 cents out of every dollar spent on food stamps goes to the bureaucrats who run the program, and 23 cents out of every dollar spent on the Housing and Urban Development's public housing program is eaten up in administrative costs. Also, there is the growing problem of illegal immigrants who collect billions of dollars in welfare though they are in the country in violation of U.S. law.
However, the other side of the coin is the growing number of jobless Americans who have been displaced by Wall Street greed and decades of destructive free-trade policies. Federal programs like unemployment assistance, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and food stamps go a long way in helping these once productive but now poor Americans feed their families and pay for shelter.
And with the rising price of food, directly attributable to investor speculation in the commodity exchange, more and more Americans are seeking out help from programs like food stamps. From October 2007 to December 2010, the number of people on food stamps has increased by 62 percent to 44.1 million. That amounts to about 13 percent of the entire U.S. population.
Still, conservative groups are praising Republicans for scrutinizing every federal program.
"Jordan's proposal is a great step in the right direction
to rein in so-called mandatory spending and reduce the $1.6 trillion
budget deficit," said Bill Wilson, the president of Americans
for Limited Government. "Rolling back key portions of federal
welfare spending to 2007 levels could save $1.4 trillion over
10 years once fully implemented."
|Top|
For the past three years, Congress has been debating whether it should pull the plug on tax deductions for charitable giving. It's a hot topic given the fact that the nonprofit sector is a multibillion dollar industry with some of the top 501(c)3s pulling in billions of dollars a year in revenue and executives paying themselves bloated salaries and "expenses."
Surprisingly, the push to eliminate these tax writeoffs is coming from the liberal Obama administration, more specifically Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who proposed the cuts during discussions on the 2012 budget. It's part of a larger White House plan to reduce the total amount wealthy people can save on their taxes through itemized deductions.
Geithner recently testified before the Senate Finance committee, saying: "The only reason we're doing this is we have unsustainable deficits. We've got to bring them down over time. And that going to force us to do things we'd otherwise not like to do."
So far, legislators have been tight-lipped about whether or not they support cutting deductions for charitable giving. Polls have shown that most rich Americans say they would scale back donations to non-profits if they could not deduct them on their taxes, so there is no doubt ending tax deductions would hit many charities in their bank accounts.
The IRS defines about 20 different tax-exempt groups are also
the largest in the world. For example, the international evangelical
organization World Vision, a 501(c)3, brings in nearly $3 billion
every year in contributions, and its president, Richard E. Stearns,
is paid about $400,000 a year. The powerful Nature Conservancy,
also a 501(c)3, brings in about $1 billion annually. Its CEO
Stephanie K. Meeks, makes $366,000 a year.
|Top|
With the BP oil disaster's tragic anniversary about to arrive, yet another gulf oil spill has been spotted, highlighting the same corruption and disinformation that was omnipresent in the media one year ago. The finger pointing and ludicrous explanations only emphasize how little truth is available from government and mainstream media sources abut the impact of the initial catastrophe and its connection to the newest one.
According to the Examiner, on March 18 a helicopter pilot spotted the latest slick, reportedly 100 miles long and 30 miles off the Louisiana coast. Since then, fishermen reported oil reaching the already ravaged coastline of South Pass, La.
A skeptical U.S. Coast Guard issued several statements dismissing these accounts. The Times-Picayune quoted Coast Guard operation controller Paul Barnard as saying, "It would be very unlikely for an individual to observe a 100-mile long sheen." On March 20, a Coast Guard vessel took samples to determine "what is actually in the water," claiming the next day that the apparent oil slick was actually "the result of large amounts of sediment."
On Mar. 24, The Wall Street Journal's Ryan Dezember reported that the Coast Guard changed its story, tracing oil that had washed ashore to a Houston-based drilling operation. This company, Anglo-Suisse, disputed the Coast Guard's assessment, saying there were only a few gallons spilled and that they ""question these findings, given that the well in question is non-producing and has been monitored closely for the last six months."
It's not unusual for an oil company to be cagey on accountability. MarketWatch reports that while BP was claiming only 1,000 barrels a day were leaking during last year's fiasco, "Congressional investigators found documents indicating BP knew as much as 14,000 barrels could be spilling each day. Government scientists eventually determined the actual spill at 62,000 barrels a day,"
BP is being investigated for insider trading to find out if their disinformation allowed them to illegally profit.
On Sept. 12, ABC News weighed in, claiming that oil from the BP disaster did not simply vanish but is sitting on the floor of the Gulf in vast quantities. According to Prof. Samantha Joye of the Department of Marine Sciences at the University of Georgia, "The oil has not disappeared, but is on the sea floor in a layer of scum." Joye added, "If we're seeing two and half inches of oil 16 miles away, God knows what we'll see close in."
A source affiliated with the Gulf Oil Spill Remediation Conference
postulated that recent seismic activity could have opened faults
in the "most fractured sea floor in the world" or there
may possibly have been "another real oil spill" being
covered up.
|Top|
A disturbing new book, How the End Begins: The Road to a Nuclear World War III, makes it clear that a third world war, involving the likely use of nuclear weapons, may be instigated by Israel. Although the author, Jewish-American writer Ron Rosenbaum, believes there are a number of possible flashpoints for nuclear war, he places Israel among the foremost sources for such a conflagration.
He foresees a "preemptive" strike by Israel, using either nuclear or conventional weapons, against some other nation, probably Iran, in order to prevent that nation from acquiring nuclear arms. This could set off a chain reaction resulting in the further use of nuclear weapons in the ensuing crisis, potentially involving the United States, Russia, Pakistan, India - the list goes on.
In fact, Rosenbaum notes that in 2007 when Israel launched a military strike on a presumed Syrian nuclear installation, the London-based Spectator published a little-noticed article on Oct. 6 quoting a senior British official: "If people had known how close we came to World Ear III that day there'd have been mass panic and we really would have been dealing with the bloody Book of Revelation and Armageddon."
Rosenbaum writes:
The fact that the hand of man finds itself recurrently, obsessively scripting fiery, self-immolating cataclysmic conclusions to the human sage may well be, at the very least, self-fulfilling prophecy. It may also say that deep down, we really are a species obsessed with its own self-destruction.
This idea of "self-destruction" being deeply rooted is particularly chilling since Israel's nuclear policy - from the beginning - has been based on the Samson Option, immortalized by Jewish-American Pulitzer Prize winner and critic of Israel Seymour Hersh in his book by that title.
Like Samson of the Bible who brought the temple down upon himself and his enemies, the "Samson Option" is the concept that Israel would commit nuclear suicide and bring the rest of the world down with it if Israel's leaders believed Israel was about to be conquered. This theme goes back to the much-heralded ancient Jewish legend of Masada - the purported "last stand" of Jewish warriors, who committed suicide in the face of a Roman onslaught.
Although Israeli scholars have proven the Masada story to be largely a myth, the importance of the legend to modern Israel is such that newly anointed Israeli military officers are sworn into their posts proclaiming: "Masada shall never fall again."
According to Rosenbaum, the modern Israeli mind set is deeply rooted in the fear of a "second Holocaust." This concept, writes Rosenbaum, "is a phrase that has become a potential motive, if no a trigger, for the outbreak of World War III in the Middle East." Rosenbaum says: "Israelis tell me that the use of the phrase ‘second Holocaust' has become normalized there.
Rosenbaum suggests the Israelis believe the international conference on the Holocaust,* held in Tehran in 2006 by the Iranian government which this writer attended, was an incitement to genocide, a deliberate call, in affect, for a "second Holocaust," and therefore provides some rationale for Israel to launch a "preemptive" strike against Iran to prevent a "second Holocaust." No such topic was discussed at the conference.
As for the morality of such an action, Rosenbaum cites Moshe Halbertal, a professor of ethics and the international law of war at both New York University Law School and the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, describing Halbertal as "one of the most widely respected thinkers on the moral and ethical dilemmas of modern warfare," who has authored a code of ethics for the Israeli Defense forces.
Halbertal says that, in some cases, a preemptive nuclear strike can be "moral" although, in Rosenmaum's assessment of his views, "retaliation after being struck by nuclear weapons cannot be."
Yet, while Halbertal believes Israel could have the right to launch a preemptive strike against Iran, Halbertal, according to the author, seems to be saying, "It's going to happen whether I like it or not.
Rosenbaum concludes: ‘It's almost a fatalistic admission that it will."
Rosenbaum concludes:
All this will make it more likely that - sooner or later - Israel will unleash nuclear weapons and risk inauguration World War III - to prevent what they perceive as an impending nuclear strike. Israel will not wait for the world to step in. They may not even wait for the world to step in. They may not even wait to be sure their intelligence is rock-solid certain. They can't afford to take that chance. It is not something I advocate; it is something I foresee.
Rosenbaum - who calls himself a "secular, liberal, nonobservant, non-Zionist, American-born Jew with no immediate family members murdered in the Holocaust" - rightly fears nuclear war, whether instigated by Israel or otherwise. He closes his book with this plea:
If you're in a position to launch, whoever you are, now or in the future, if you're in a position to send the targeting codes, if it's up to you, whoever you are, my plea is "Nothing justifies following orders for genocide. Don't send those codes, don't twist those keys."
* For proof that Jews (in any number) were not gassed by Adolf
Hitler, send $10 for a 100-page special issue of The Barnes Review
magazine dedicated to the subject. Assembled by AFP's Michel
collins Piper, this "All-Holocaust" issue has all the
information you need to convince yourself that the Holocaust
is the biggest hoax of the 20th century. Send request with payment
to TB, P.O. Box 15877, Washington, D.C. 20003.
|Top|
Near the coast of Japan's Fukushima nuclear reactor, tests reveal that radioactive iodine levels are 1,250 times higher than normal, while workers inside this stricken facility have been exposed to radiation that is 10,000 times the normal exposure.
Despite a concerted media effort to downplay the seriousness of the crippled reactors that are plagued by highly radioactive water and exposed nuclear fuel rods, the Japanese government has urged residents within an 18-mile radius of the plant to leave the area.
According to Japan Today on March 26, "Those who have remained in a movement-restricted area12.5 to 18.5 miles away from the plant say they are feeling increasingly isolated. Towns were abandoned by many people, apparently scared by the government's instruction to shelter indoors for fear of radiation exposure."
Meanwhile, milk, vegetables, fruits meat and seafood originating from the affected area have been banned in Singapore due to radiation fears. Similarly, officials have declared Tokyo's drinking water unfit for children due to radioactive vapors that have been found in rainfall.
In China, two Japanese tourists were hospitalized after being tested with severely high radiation levels. ABC News reported on March 25, "The General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine said radiation levels that ‘seriously exceeded limits' were detected on the two when they arrived in the eastern city of Wuxi."
To compound matters, Japanese officials finally realized that
seawater being sprayed onto the exposed radioactive fuel rods
might have actually been corrosive to the facility. They have
since switched to fresh water delivered by U.S. naval ships.
|Top|
Did the Israeli created Stuxnet computer "worm" contribute to Japan's Fukushima nuclear power plant meltdown? Although a definite smoking gun does not exist, evidence, motive and past acts of sabotage indicate possible Israeli involvement.
During a March 23 interview, Mark Glenn warned: "The real story is not whether Israel's Stuxnet virus caused the catastrophe in Japan, but instead the fact that they can use the computer virus any time they want. If Israel can get people into Iran, are we to assume they can't infiltrate Japan?"
On March 21, radio talk show host Mike Rivero theorized how this process works. The U.S. and Israel originally created the Stuxnet computer worm to destroy Iran's nuclear power station by targeting their German-made Siemens programmable computer systems.
These Siemens control systems are standard gear for industrial centers worldwide, and it's been established by the Symantec Corp. That Stuxnet had corrupted 63 of Japan's personal computers since last October. The Daily Yomiuri reported on Oct. 5, 2010, "A Symantec engineer who has analyzed the virus said it was made using advanced technology, and it is highly likely a well-funded organization, not an individual, produced it."
The Fukushima power plant utilized Siemens control systems with which Stuxnet viruses interfere and ultimately target. These automated systems were designed to shut down the reactors in times of crisis, but during the March 11 earthquake and tsunami, pumps, valves and diesel generators failed to properly operate.
By all accounts, Stuxnet enters into computer servers via USB memory sticks. Therefore, the only way plotters could have contaminated Japan's nuclear plant was if they had direct access.
In this light, Ora Coren revealed a crucial piece to the puzzle in a March 18 Haaretz article stating that Magna BSP - a high-tech Israeli firm - installed security systems at Fukushima "about a year ago."
According to the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, "The security system was designed to guard the plant against any hostile elements seeking to seize radioactive material to use in a terrorist attack."
In addition, Magna CEO Haim Siboni confirmed, "We have an agreement in principle with the Japanese that we will provide protection for all of the country's nuclear reactors."
The online news site Highbeam reported on Dec. 9, 2000, "Siemens has been aearded the contract to supply 100 fuel assemblies for Unit 5 of Fukushima Dai-Ichi Nuclear Power Station."
In a March 3 article - only eight days prior to Japan's nuclear disaster - investigative reporter Glen Chapman wrote: "A German computer sucurity expert said he believes the United States and Israel's Mossad unleashed the malicious Stuxnet worm on Iran's nuclear program."
The expert he referred to, Ralph Langner, said: "The idea behind the Stuxnet computer worm is really quite simple. We don't want Iran to get the bomb." By targeting computer control systems manufactured by Siemens, Langner emphasized, "digital safety systems are compromised and really bad things can happen - your plant can blow up."
So if it wasn't an accidental infection, why would Israel unleash this cyber weapon of mass destruction on Japan? It appears that lately, Japanese officials have been especially outspoken in their denunciation of Israeli apartheid practices and genocide committed against the Palestinian people.
In fact, on March 8 - only three days before the Fukushima disaster - Rep. Naofumi Hashimoto called for the establishment of an "independent Palestinian state." He added: "The Japanese government is determined to continue its support for the Palestinian people."
In March, these same Japanese officials condemned Israel's expansion into East Jerusalem and the West Bank while promising $1.1 billion to the Palestinian Authority.
Proof of Israel's capacity and desire to disable nuclear facilities is legendary. On June 7, 1981 they attacked Iraq's Osirak reactor. Israelis also destroyed a Syrian nuclear plant believed to be under construction on Sept. 6, 2007 after their radar systems were disabled by cyber attacks that involved a remotely controlled "kill switch." Lastly, best evidence indicates that Iran's Bushehr operation near Natanz fell victim to a Stuxnet plague in 2010.
The New York Times weighed in on this situation by quoting a former U.S. intelligence officer on Sept. 26 2010. This man claimed that the Stuxnet virus used to disable Bushehr originated from a top-secret Israeli "intel" squad known as Unit 8200. AFP's Ralph Forbes detailed this in a report in the January 24, 2011 edition.
Following the Japanese meltdown, German leader Angela Merkel
ordered the shutdown of her country's seven oldest nuclear reactors.
Furthermore, on Feb. 1 Yukiya Amano, director general of the
International Atomic Energy Agency, proclaimed that Stuxnet posed
a problem to every nuclear plant in the world.
|Top|
China and other adversaries may not have to worry much about U.S. military prowess if they can use cyber weapons to attack our highly complex digital infrastructure, including fragile financial networks. Those networks are so complex that Washington cannot seem to identify all the culprits responsible for the financial 2008 crisis, or fully explain what went wrong.
Although most people believe greed was at the heart of the collapse, there has been no comprehensive analysis of what caused it. Some experts believe we should look for explanations outside of Washington. China has been assembling a massive cyber capability, which could bring about the downfall of our major financial institutions in a time of war, heaven forbid.
Did America's overseas enemies play a role in the 2008 crisis? While no rock-solid evidence has yet been found to support that position, it does not mean there was no foreign cyber fingerprint on Wall Street's implosion. Unless there is an independent investigation, which is unlikely, we may never know the truth. Our enemies will surely know, however, that Wall Street, the federal Reserve and Washington will continue business as usual. In that event, a country like China may eventually be able to seriously cripple or take down a super power like the United States without firing a shot.
America is one of the most wired nations on Earth. Everything we need to survive - banking, power, travel and communications - is routed through computers. While some of its power grids and a lot of the military installations have been hardened against cyber attacks, the greatest risk is in the financial and banking sectors.
The reality is our major financial institutions operate behind walls of secrecy that Washington has allowed them to build. They have created complex monetary mechanisms, whereby billions, if not trillions of dollars, can be moved across the globe with a computer key stroke.
A specialist who thinks we are presently at risk of cyber terrorism aimed at our financial well being is Kevin D. Freeman. His 2009 study for the Pentagon, Economic Warfare: Risks and Responses, recently came to light. We are playing with fire by spending massive sums on weapons systems while ignoring the need to sort out the complexity of Wall Street's financial mechanisms, he contends.
Congress was told in 2009 that China represented America's
greatest cyber threat. Taking down a power grid on America's
East Coast in the winter could kill thousands and cost billions.
Attacking hundreds of supply companies that have little cyber
protection could also hurt the overall U.S. economy, but a massive
attack on the financial networks could be catastrophic. Yet little
effort has been made to assess the true levels of vulnerability.
|Top|
Internationalist billionaire George Soros is holding his international conference April 8 to April 11 at Bretton Woods, N.H., the noted birthplace of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, where he plans to "rearrange the entire financial order," as he noted in a November 2009 article in The Japan Times Online.
This "Bretton
Woods II" comes along just as the Trilateral Commission
will be meeting at the same time in Washington, D.C. With an
apparent goal of creating nothing less than a new global economy,
Soros is spending $50 million in New Hampshire to bring together
up to 200 academic, business and government policy leaders under
his Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET).
As AFP goes to press, the attendees are to include ex-Fed
Chairman Paul Volcker, former British Prime Minister Gordon Brown
and World Bank executive and Nobel Prize winner in economics
Joseph Stiglitz.
The conference is slated for the Mount Washington Hotel, site
of the historic 1944 Bretton Woods conference, which established
the post-World War II international financial architecture.
Soros chose this site because he expects his proposed reforms to be as radical as those promoted by British economist John Maynard Keynes, the much-praised "genius" of the original Bretton Woods project.
Keynesian economics have been portrayed as a cure to the Western world's postwar devastation, in that governments were liberated of money creation restrictions imposed by the gold standard, even while global financiers controlled much of the world's gold like they do now. Governments, under the new paradigm after the war, were encouraged to promote economic growth and macroeconomic stability by creating more debt-based money for everything that ailed the economy—debt that has brought most of the world's economies to the brink of bankruptcy.
Now Soros comes along as the new Keynes to save the day by proposing another miracle solution to our problems, couched in lofty doublespeak such as "reform," "cooperation" and "equal participation." Soros is proposing the end of sovereignty as we know it.
"Reorganizing the world order will need to extend beyond the financial system," Soros wrote in his opinion piece.
Soros is saying that a washed-up America should be replaced by a world government with a global currency under UN rule. He also advocates that China should be top dog while we play second fiddle. What Soros doesn't say is that two decades of outsourcing U.S. industry, opening the borders and bankrupting the economy with pointless wars and other debacles have been intentionally orchestrated so that now international bankers can tell the world the system is broken and that the individuals who broke it need to show us how to fix it.
Georgy Schwartz, aka George Soros, is a Hungarian Jew who has been described as anti-God, anti-family and anti-American. By his own admission he even helped confiscate the homes of fellow Jews in Hungary in 1944.
In an interview with Steve Kroft of 60 Minutes he said 1944 was the best year of his life. Asked by Kroft if he felt any remorse, he answered, "No, not at all; I rather enjoyed it."
"No feelings of guilt?" asked Kroft. "No," answered Soros, "only feelings of power."
Soros made his first billion as a currency speculator in 1992 by shorting the British pound and causing misery to millions of hardworking British citizens. He went on to cause the 1999 Russiagate scandal, almost collapsing the Russian economy. It was described as "one of the greatest social robberies in human history."
He did the same to Thailand and Malaysia in 1997, causing the Asian financial crisis of that time. Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad called him "a villain and a moron," while Thailand's PM referred to him as "Dracula." He also helped dismantle Yugoslavia and caused major trouble in Japan, Indonesia, Georgia, Ukraine and Burma by raiding their economies.
Soros also fosters cultural degeneracy by supporting abortion rights, atheism, drug legalization, sex education, euthanasia, feminism, gun control, globalization, mass immigration, gay marriage etc. Soros funded Barack Obama's campaign and often visits the White House.
At 81, taking down America appears to be his final challenge. "The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States. The time has come for a very serious adjustment," he said.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
Monday, June 6
10 a.m. Arrive at Days Inn in Arlington (703-525-0300)
Cab to National Press Club, then AFP Office in Washington, D.C. Visit bank, get money.
Tuesday, June 7
5:50 p.m. Leave Washington-Dulles United Flight 936.
Wednesday, June 8
8:05 a.m. Arrive in Zurich
Take cab to train station.
Take train 567 ZUR-CHUR to St. Moritz
Check into Hotel Laudinella-Superior (telephone from U.S.: 011-41-81-836-0000. Chase Bilderberg. Precise location of Bilderberg unknown. We have to shop until we are denied entrance by armed guards.)
Chase BIlderberg
Monday, June 13
5:57 a.m. Take train 1116 566 CHUR-ZUR to Zurich
Cab to airport
1155 a.m. Leave Zurich United Flight 937
3:14 p.m. Arrive Washington Dulles
Check into Days Inn
Deliver stories to AFP.
|Top|
Two former Democratic leaders in Michigan face criminal charges for allegedly attempting to get fake "tea party" candidates on ballots last November. This comes after two U.S. congressmen were accused of lying when they claimed tea party protesters spat on them. It fits a media pattern of attempting to paint typically peaceful protesters as impolite, potentially violent fools.
Former Oakland County Democratic Party Chairman Michael McGuinness and former operations director Jason Bauer were indicted March 16 on forgery and perjury charges. Bauer also faces three counts of notary fraud. Facing up to 14 years in prison if convicted, they were each released on $25,000 bond.
The indictment accuses them of trying to install three people on the ballot without their knowledge. Aaron W. Tyler and Ruth Ann Spearman were to be county commission candidates. Jonathan M. Young was to be a state Senate candidate. The suspects forged the signatures on the affidavit of identity and falsely swore under oath to qualify their three victims to run, the indictment alleges.
"Bauer stepped down from his position following allegations that he notarized and filed papers for 13 sham candidates from the Michigan Tea Party," noted a report at the web site SenatorTeaParty.com. "In September, Michigan Circuit Court judges authorized a one-man grand jury to investigate the allegations. The Michigan Supreme Court also blocked the fake candidates from appearing on the ballot."
Republican and tea party officials had expressed suspicion that the Michigan Tea Party was being manipulated to enhance the chances of Democratic candidates in a candidate-snatching scheme carried out by forging the names of unsuspecting "minor candidates."
This behavior follows a year-long pattern of shabby characters sometimes shown displaying tea party signs while cavorting at the rallies of polite and better-groomed tea party participants, where an obliging media pursues the unkempt tea partiers for photographs—suggesting their appearance is "typical."
During one of numerous peaceful tea party rallies on Capitol Hill protesting big federal spending sprees, Reps. John Lewis (D-Ga.) and Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) claimed they had been spat upon by rally participants.
Of course, they were swarmed by broadcasters and journalists, asking their opinion about the tea party. Both groused that tea partiers had spat on them. The congressmen's allegations have been challenged by honest media outlets, including AFP.
AFP editor James P. Tucker Jr. is a veteran journalist who spent many years as a member of the "elite" media in Washington. Since 1975 he has won widespread recognition, here and abroad, for his pursuit of on-the-scene stories reporting the intrigues of global power blocs such as the Bilderberg Group. Tucker is the author of Jim Tucker's Bilderberg Diary: One Man's 25-Year Battle to Shine the Light on the World Shadow Government. Bound in an attractive full-color softcover and containing 272 pages—loaded with photos, many never published before—the book recounts Tucker's experiences over the last quarter century at Bilderberg meetings. $25 from AFP. No charge for S&H in U.S.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
Texas Republican Rep. Ron Paul announced on April 4, as head of the powerful House Domestic Monetary Policy Subcommittee, he will be initiating congressional hearings into reports the Federal Reserve made hundreds of billions of dollars worth of sweetheart loans to foreign banks.
Fed officials had tried desperately to keep the details of these transactions under wraps by repeatedly appealing a lawsuit that was brought by two reporters working for the New York-based Bloomberg News. They argued that, if the details of such deals are released, the public would lose confidence in the banking system.
In late March, however, the Supreme Court upheld previous rulings by lower courts that the Fed must comply with the information requests. So, the Fed dumped hundreds of pages of records onto the public. Over the course of the April Fools Day weekend, AFP's editors were able to examine a portion of the Fed's documents, only to learn that the joke has always been on the American people.
In 2008, banks around the world were struggling to stay solvent as their risky trading in complex derivatives weighed heavily on their balance sheets. As a result, the Fed, at varying times, made hundreds of billions of dollars worth of emergency loans at its "discount window."
Such transactions are usually only reserved for lending of last resort to institutions that could not get funding from anywhere else, such as by floating more stock or selling bonds.
Some of the largest banks, such as Wachovia and Morgan Stanley, repeatedly hit up the Fed for short-term loans worth billions of dollars. From Sept. 18, 2008 to Sept. 24, 2008, Washington Mutual borrowed $2 billion every day until its collapse on Sept. 25, 2008. It was eventually bought out by JPMorgan in a now-infamous fire sale.
But what shocked Fed watchers the most was the volume of transactions the private central bank conducted with foreign banks. In thousands of "emergency loans," foreign banks repeatedly came to the Fed asking for U.S. dollars at near-zero percent interest rates.
At varying times, some of the top borrowers included Brussels-based Dexia Bank ($33.5 billion), Dublin-based Depfa Bank ($24.5 billion), Parisbased Societe Generale ($5 billion), Tokyo-based Norinchukin ($6 billion), Bank of China ($198 million) and two Deutsche Bank AG divisions ($1 billion each).
One of the most controversial was the Arab Banking Corp., which borrowed more than $35 billion. Arab Banking Corp. is 35 percent owned by the Central Bank of Libya. Regardless of what readers may think of Libya, the Federal Reserve made an estimated 73 loans to the Central Bank of Libya—the national bank of a country the U.S. military is currently bombing.
In an official statement on the Fed's data dump, Rep. Paul said: "These lending activities provided no benefit to American taxpayers, the American economy or even directly to American banks. . . . It is becoming more and more obvious that the Fed operates for the benefit of a few privileged banks, banks that never suffer for bad decisions they make. Quite the opposite—as we have seen since October 2008, under our current monetary system politically connected banks are paid to make bad decisions."
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
After suffering through eight years of the Bush-Cheney war machine, Barack Obama's 2008 victory was supposed to usher in a new era of tranquility. To great acclaim, this recently elected "peace president" promised hope, change and an end to the imperialistic aims of his neo-conservative predecessor.
Yet two years later, the United States is now entangled in its third official war as the situation in Libya continues to escalate. Further, to the dismay of his most loyal supporters, Obama's policies are becoming a mirror image of the man he derided for years.
The similarities between Bush's Iraq war and Obama's Libyan campaign are particularly troublesome. Both men sought United Nations approval prior to their attacks, while each justified their preemptive attacks on "humanitarian" grounds.
Even eerier, Bush and Obama based these wars on what "could potentially happen"—i.e., weapons of mass destruction purportedly hidden by Saddam Hussein, and a potential slaughter in a Libyan city. In addition, Iraq and Libya both hold vast oil reserves, each of their leaders was staunchly anti-Israel and neither U.S. president provided clear-cut exit strategies.
If that's not enough, Obama has continued the abhorrent Bush-Cheney practice of "extraordinary rendition," whereby captured "terrorists" are drugged and then secretly sent to foreign countries to be tortured. He has kept the prison at Guantanamo Bay open. He has escalated drone predator attacks in Pakistan and has increased troop levels in Afghanistan.
Obama even has his own "war criminal" scandal. Whereas Bush and Rumsfeld were scandalized by the Abu Ghraib nightmare, the current president now has to answer for even more inhumane "kill team" photos that occurred on his watch.
This story was detailed in AFP's April 11 edition on page 4, which includes graphic photos of U.S. soldiers taking trophy shots with murdered Afghans. As Daniel Bates and Mark Duell wrote for the Daily Mail on March 29: "In one horrific episode in the latest scandal, troops allegedly threw a grenade at an innocent Afghan boy before chopping off his finger and using it as a gambling chip."
Democrats and Republicans alike are incensed by the fact that whereas Bush at least received congressional approval prior to his war efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq, Obama failed to even make that simple gesture.
As AFP recently noted, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) has gone so far as to label the president's Libyan attack an "impeachable offense."
After promising not to place any American combat boots on the ground in Libya, on March 30 Obama signed a secret presidential finding to green-light covert operations by the CIA and other "intel" agencies.
Prior to this move, activist Ralph Nader declared that if George W. Bush was guilty of "war crimes," then so is Obama. Time magazine's Mark Halperin quipped that Obama is more "hawkish" than the man he replaced.
Likewise, filmmaker Michael Moore demanded that Obama return his 2009 Nobel Peace Prize. All of the international meddling and war-making of the Bush and Obama administrations is based on the massive fiction that on Sept. 11, 2001, some terrorists hijacked Boeing 767s, took over the complicated controls and crashed them into buildings built to withstand any such shock, after which the buildings crashed to the ground.
All honest engineers who have analyzed this fairy tale have branded it a ridiculous lie. Meanwhile, Larry Silverstein, the owner of one of the buildings, wants billions of dollars from insurance companies that accept the official line. This fable is even beyond what one can find in the wildest children's storybook.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
Leaders of the Trilateral Commission (TC), who met behind closed doors at 1957 E Street NW in Washington the weekend of April 9-10, are upset that Americans realize their war against Libya is for the purpose of sowing more unrest in the Middle East, stealing that nation's riches and making the United States a greater target for terrorism and other forms of retribution.
AFP first reported that "rebel" forces may not be
completely under the thumb of the Western powers. Subsequently,
the
mainstream media felt compelled
to include the information - buried deep in their stories.
"This will make it much harder to pursue the war in Libya," said Joseph F. Nye Jr. According to an inside source. "These people will try to scare congressmen out of supporting military action of any kind."
Nye, TC's North American chairman, was speaking with Michael Fuchs, European deputy chairman, and Mario Monti, European chairman.
"They have scared the hell out of Robert Gates," said Fuchs, referring to the U.S. secretary of defense.
"Others are squirming, too," said Monti, naming Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner. Both are members of the TC and Bilderberg, which will meet in Switzerland in June. Both groups see war in Libya as a means of invading Iran on behalf of Israel . Leaders of both groups will enjoy immense profits from war profiteering. The costs in American blood and treasure will be high, but this will help perpetuate the global recession, which they also desire. Global economic stress, they maintain, is key to establishing world government.
There was much nattering about the need to "balance the world economy," as in reducing America's standard of living while improving the economy in the rest of the world. By forcing the price of fuel skyward, TC and its brother group, the more exclusive bilderberg, plan to perpetuate the U.S. recession, which their cheerleading economists insist is over.
By increasing oil prices, TC and Bilderberg will force general prices to increase while unemployment remains high. In average, 25 percent to as much as 40 percent of what you pay for any product is attributed to the cost of transportation in the long journey from raw material to finished product at the marketplace.
Internationalists complain that, even at $4 a gallon, Americans fare much better than Europeans, who pay $7. They want costs in America to rise to a similar level, generating huge profits. They celebrate the fact that Americans produce more while earning less. Many consumer prices have gone up more than 5 percent in three weeks.
Now that "Americans are no longer in combat," said one, "we can keep the war going." But the reality is, the United States is still paying the bulk of NATO's expenses to keep the war going in Libya.
Early arrivals to the TC meeting included Juergen Kroeger
of the European Commission and Constantine Papadopoulos of the
Greek Foreign Ministry.
|Top|
The recent London protest that brought approximately a half-million family members and public service workers onto the streets and led to an unfortunate sideshow of 500 masked and angry protesters battling the police was more evidence of growing anger toward austerity cuts and autocracy.
The largest protest of its kind in two decades, the event reflected increased public disillusionment with bank bailouts, tax concessions for the super rich, reduced public service pay and significantly increased university tuition fees. The protest organizer, Trades Union Congress (TUC) of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, claimed it was time for people to show they were the "Big Society" and not government.
One union leader told marchers they were on the streets to "bear witness" as the government created another jobless generation so the "rich and greedy" could live as they pleased. His anger was palpable in a massive march comprised of families and pensioners and workers representing all public sector professions, including nursing, the fire service and local authorities.
Violence by more than 500 masked protesters, many armed with cudgels, ammonia bombs, flares, fireworks and stones, left several policemen and some protesters blooded and injured. More than 200 protesters were arrested and charged with public order offenses, while many were treated for minor injuries. In the wake of the violence, which marred a generally peaceful protest, the government declared it would give the police new powers. The announcement was met with criticism by the trade union, which promised more protests throughout 2011. Some observers saw the government's reaction as astrategy to use tougher police controls to curb future demonstrations.
Growing disenchantment with governments that are in the pocket of the super rich and with globalization is being expressed throughout the European Union. The Germans, however, are leaving the rhetoric to others as they continue to show their country is the economic engine of Europe and one of the most successful economies globally.
Germany has beaten all the odds and does not have to bend to political or economic pressure from London, Paris or Washington any more. It is proving it can go it alone, ignoring calls to fall into line with broader EU centralized policies. Essentially, it has drawn on its engineering brilliance, high-end products and production capacity to compete. It has 82 million people, making it the largest EU nation. Though it is minuscule compared to China, Germany has also shown it has China's ability to develop a highly efficient export output.
While Germany may no longer be the failing "elder statesman" of Europe - a moniker it earned following the unification of the East and the West - there is little optimism elsewhere in the EU.
Many political groups are arguing that global economic models have created blighted economies. Ireland and Greece are stark examples of nations suffering severe economic hardship because of the massive bailout of greedy banks and other financial institutions.
Some commentators are predicting the financial malaise is so deeply rooted it will soon take down the economies of Spain and Portugal.
Ordinary Europeans are beginning to warn that the one-size-fits-all
concept promoted by the EU is a dangerous ideal and could likely
spell the end of this experiment in European government.
|Top|
In a rare moment of sanity in Washington, D.C., Federal reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke was dragged before the house Financial Services Committee in early March to testify about the state of the U.S. economy and what role the privately owned and controlled central bank's monetary policy has played in the latest spate of price increases.
In his opening statement, Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), who chairs the House's Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology Subcommittee, blasted the Fed for dumping trillions of dollars into the United States in a risky gamble to bolster America's foundering economy. The result of this, he said, has been rising prices for commodities like oil and food.
Here's what Paul said in his opening statement:
"Every day we hear stories about rising prices. Whether it be food, gasoline or clothing the cost of living is going up, and not just for Americans, but for people around the globe. The Federal Reserve's program of "quantitative easing" has taken some of the blame for this, and rightly so in my opinion. This program known as "QE2" sought to purchase a total of $900 billion in R.S. Treasury debt over a period of eight months. Roughly $110 billion of newly created money is flooding into markets each month, markets which are still gun-why after the events of the last few years. Banks still hold underperforming mortgage-backed securities on their books and are hesitant to loan out further money, holding well over a trillion dollars on reserve with the Fed. Is it any wonder, then, that this new "hot money" is flowing into commodities around the world?"
Later during the hearing, Paul asked the arrogant and visibly annoyed Bernanke: "How can you manage monetary policy, which means to manage the dollar, when there is no definition of the dollar. What is your definition of a dollar?"
Bernanke responded: "My definition of the dollar is what it can buy. Consumers don't want to buy gold. They want to buy food and gasoline and clothes and all the other things that are in the consumer basket. It is the buying power of the dollar in terms of those goods and services that is what is important, and that's what I call price stability."
Bernanke then added that the Fed has worked to maintain price stability and low unemployment for the past three decades.
"There has been improvement, " he claimed.
But the truth is, the purchasing power of the dollar has been in a free fall since the Federal Reserve first fired up its printing presses in 1914.
According to USInflationCalculator.com, a web site maintained by Mike Unser of Coin News, prices have increased by over 2,113.1 percent since 1914. In other words, what an American could buy for $1 in 1914 would today cost $22.13.
But this only tells part of the story. In other sectors, such as housing, inflation has increased by even more. For Example, in 1914, Sears sold by mail order beautiful, American-made, two-story, single-family homes for less than $1,500. The kits were delivered by railroad. Today, similar houses can go for $200,000 or more. That is an inflation rate of 13,233 percent.
"For too long the federal Reserve's monetary policy has
led to higher prices and a decreased purchasing power of the
dollar," said Paul. "It is well overdue that this committee
exercise increased oversight and scrutiny of the Fed's actions,
and I look forward to further committee action to rein in the
Fed."
|Top|
American-led air strikes against Libya were launched on March 19, 2011, eight years to the day after the U.S. invasion of Iraq. That date is not only significant in terms of American interventionism, but is also widely celebrated among occult circles.
To some, March 19 is a sacred day that commemorates the birth of Minerva, the Roman equivalent to the Greek war goddess Athena. In ancient times, a five-day festival was held in her honor. The Quinquatria, as it was known, was marked by violence and bloodshed as gladiators fought to the death in arenas throughout the Roman empire.
Coincidence? Perhaps. Dismissing any correlation between the birthdate of a character out of Roman folklore and two separate U.S. military campaigns might seem reasonable were it not for the fact that Minerva symbolism and imagery can be found as an integral part of the U.S. government's shadow identity. Minerva is on the Congressional Medal of Honor, and she is also portrayed in a gigantic mosaic in the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C.
That said, it shouldn't be too hard to convince even the most staunch skeptic that warmongers in Washington, D.C. don't need to dig deep into mythology to find women who'll help them facilitate their hawkish agenda.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has proved herself to be a female symbol of contemporary warfare. She is part of a gang The Nation's Robert Dreyfuss refers to as a "troika" of "warrior women." Rounding out this trio are Samantha Power of the National security Council and Susan Rice, who serves as barack Obama's ambassador to the UN. These so-called "liberal interventionists" played a role in goading the president into an open-ended war with Libya that cost the American taxpayer more than $400 million in its first six days of operation.
Many from Obama's staff were opposed to a confrontation with Muammar Quadaffi. But, contrary to the advice of Defense Secretary Robert Gates, National security Adviser Tom Donilon and counter terrorism chief John Brennan, Mrs. Clinton and her "femmes fatales" instead chose to side with names like Paul Wolfowitz, William Kristol, Elliot Abrams, Robert Kagan Eric Edelman and others of that ilk.
These notorious pro-Zionist "neo-conservatives" operate out of an organization known as the Foreign Policy Initative (FPI), which is PNAC 2,0.
PNAC, or Project for a New American Century, is a blueprint of war and other forms of conquest and control drawn up by the neo-cons several years ago.
Their meddling has never been instrumental in taking America into yet another Israeli-driven excursion. Here's how they made it happen.
After 50,000 mercenaries from Israel were sent into Libya to stir up civil unrest in mid-February, the press began propagating disinformation that accused Qadaffi of bombing civilians in Benghazi. The Russians immediately debunked these false rumors, and even defense Secretary gates and Adm. Mike Mullins were forced to admit the allegations were completely false.
But that didn't stop the FPI from embracing theselies and using them as the basis of a letter they sent to Obama demanding that he "end the violence" by way of a full-scale military attack.
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a powerful lobby, was the next Zionist entity to get involved, giving an endorsement-by-proxy through Sens. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.), who phoned the president from Tel Aviv and insisted that Washington supply Libyan rebels with arms and establish a no-fly zone over the country.
Last but not least was the notorious Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). That's where Mrs. Clinton comes in. Though portrayed as a group of non-partisan thinkers, the CFR runs the State Department and CIA.
When Obama spoke to the nation on the Libyan situation, something
happened that was unprecedented. Normally, war has a tendency
to boost a president's approval rating. But that didn't happen.
However, Mrs. Clinton's approval ratings soared. Some speculate
that Mrs. Clinton may be parlaying her hawkish reputation into
a bid for the Oval Office.
|Top|
Americans are supposed to believe that the United States' latest war in Libya is to assist "a spontaneous uprising" led by desert inhabitants seeking freedom and democracy. But up until his appointment as Libys's rebel leader, Khalifa Hifter, lived less than five miles from CIA headquarters in Langley, Va.
Nary a word has been mentioned during nightly newscasts about the "leader" who is commandeering Libya's rebel forces. Instead, the media portrays these loose bands of freedom fighters riding around in pickup trucks as simpletons playing a game of cowboys and Indians.
Yet the individual officially in charge of these opposition forces is Hifter, a man in his late 60s who once served as Col. Muammar Qadaffi's top military officer.
For the past two decades, however, Hifter has been residing in northern Virginia, only miles away from our nation's capital. Sources who've followed Hifter's activities remark that he has no visible means of income, but he's still able to support a large family
RUMORS OF CIA TIES
Rumors of CIA-affiliations have surrounded Hifter since the early 1990s. A 2001 book, Manipulations Africaines, describes how, in 1987, Hifter defected from Qadaffi's ranks, only to join the CIA-backed and financed Libyan National Salvation Front.
Hifter subsequently formed his own militia unit in Chad, Whereupon he waged a rebellion against Qadaffi's Libyan forces, a Washington Post article on March 26, 1996 exposed the frontman for these anti-Qadaffi troops. "Its leader is Col. Khalifa Hifter of a contra-style group based in the United States called the Libyan National Army," reported the Post.
Journalist Jonathan Cunningham cites Hifter as a "longtime
CIA collaborator," as does reporter Patrick Martin in his
article, "American Media Silent on CIA Ties to Libya Rebel
Commander."
|Top|
Most Americans have come to realize that big business directs
the federal government, and that small-town America and the average
person too often are left chewing o scraps. So it's hardly surprising
that some one like General Electric Chief Executive Officer Jeffrey
Immelt is replacing former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker
as head of a prominent economic panel "advising" the
Obama administration.
Immelt will help ensure that the government does not get any silly notions about nationalist economics replacing internationalist economics. Immelt "under stands what it takes for America to compete in the global economy," Obama was quoted as saying.
Obama's economic homely was given as he joined Immelt during a recent event I Schenectady, N.Y., the birthplace of GE's energy business.
"In announcing Immelt's appointment to take the helm of the newly renamed President's Council on Jobs and Competitiveness, Obama said the economy is ‘in a different place' from where it was during the financial crisis when "Volcker was brought on, and new ideas are needed to keep the momentum going," added Bloomberg News, which maintained the grand illusion that only corporate heavyweights such as Immelt have anything meaningful to say on economic recovery.
But the fortunes of GE, America Largest corporation, are not limited to its chief giving the government "advice." The well-known company does not own any U.S. income taxes for 2010. Carl Person, a longtime contact of this AFP writer, finds that especially interesting. Person - an innovative Manhattan attorney - is busy devising ways to counteract the noxious influence of big business in a country whose last two Treasury chiefs came straight from Goldman Sachs.
A recent New York Times report noted that GE does not currently own any federal income tax - even though the company reported "worldwide profits of $14.2 billion," "a tax benefit of $3.2 billion," with "$5.1 billion of its total profits coming from its U.S. operations."
Person responded, "They allocate their expenses to the U.S. - though they have operations in many other countries." So, GE writes off expenses regarding U.S. operations but claims taxable profits only in relatively low-tax havens outside the states.
"That's what globalization has created - an opportunity not to pay taxes here but still sell products here," added Person. The government is then denied revenue it should be receiving from GE and many other corporations, while citizens toil, rarely get a tax reprieve and are too dependent on corporations for what ever employment remains.
Global companies like GE are exceedingly tough to monitor for enforcing tax laws. "It's all too gigantic for the U.S. government to handle," Person observed.
Like Person, another economic activist, Dr. E. Michael Jones, is tired of the"corporatocracy" and its stranglehold on America. Fresh from an insightful economics conference covered by AFP in the April 4 edition, Jones said that FE's nonpayment of U.S. taxes and involvement advising the government underscores how big business is put on a pedestal, but that "the looting of pension funds and Social Security is shown in its proper light," since the federal government's revenue losses when corporations don't pay taxes have to be recovered somehow. "It always comes down to looting labor," Jones said.
Late author Gus Stelzer, a General Motors executive who was a rare working man's hero, often said that whatever one may thing of the federal government's shocking spending excesses, big companies should not be allowed to escape their tax obligations and still receive the privilege of selling their foreign-produced products in the U.S. market with hardly any tariffs attached. When they get away with this, they deny the federal government import revenue while undercutting the manufacturing base. Much-needed wages and revenues are killed that domestic manufacturing typically generates.
Meanwhile, the Immelts of the world receive huge salaries and bonuses no matter what happens to the workers that make GE's products. If production is off-shored in pursuit of cheaper labor and lower taxes, profits for those at the top increase even more.
Indeed, as the Times noted, various tax shelters, credits
and subsidies, "as well as changes in tax laws that encouraged
some businesses and professionals to file as individuals, have
pushed down the corporate share of the nation's tax receipts
- from 30 percent of all federal revenue in the mid-1950s to
6.6 percent in 2009."
|Top|
Israel's official policy regarding its nuclear capability
is explained in the Hebrew word amimut, which means nuclear
opacity - that is, official secrecy about its arsenal of weapons
of mass destruction.
In order to more fully understand the ramifications, American Free Press interviewed Israeli-born Dr. Avner Cohen, a senior fellow at the Washington, D.C. based James Martin Center for Non-proliferation Studies.
Cohenis an internationally acclaimed expert and author of The Worst Kept Secret: Israel's Bargain with the Bomb. The book was nearly 10 years in the making as it relied heavily on declassified documents, including many White House memos.
Although they are widely recognized to possess between 75 and 400 nuclear weapons, "For over 40 years, to this very day, Israel has never acknowledged this and has committed to say essentially nothing abut its stance on this issue," explained Cohen.
"The whole world knows it," he continued, "which is why this is the worst kept secret."
The main reason the policy has remained in place for so long is that, according to Cohen, "Israel's national security elite see no realistic alternative to amimut."
The roots of amimut can be found in what Cohen contends was a still-secret oral agreement reached on Sept. 26, 1969 between President Richard Nixon and Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir during an evening stroll on the White House lawn. There, Cohen believes, Mrs Meir spilled the beans on Israel's nuclear accomplishments and Nixon saw no other option that to keep this information under wraps, primarily in order to maintain the existing global non-proliferation regime.
Some of Cohen's critics note that although much of his thesis is founded on the idea that such a secret agreement was reached between Nixon and Mrs. Meir, there is no documentary evidence of this. Rather, the thesis is based on Cohen's own speculation, as a close reading of his actual book makes clear.
"Part of the policy of opacity, or amimut," said Cohen, "is the fact that both Israel and the United States do not say anything in public that implies that Israel has nuclear weapons. American officials cannot imply knowledge of Israeli possession of nuclear weapons."
Since amimut is an oral and not written agreement, all U.S. presidents since Nixon have been briefed about it. According to Cohen's book, "When Jimmy Carter assumed the presidency in 1977, Israel was so concerned that the accord might not reach the new president that it asked Kissinger to personally brief him."
More recently, when Obama was set to occupy the White House, then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert asked outgoing President Bush to make sure to tell the president-elect about the agreement.
Cohen emphasized the importance of Israel maintaining its secrecy about its nukes.
"As long as Israel does not openly acknowledge its nuclear status, I think Arab states feel more comfortable, because it covers their sense of weakness in relation to Israel," he said.
A shift in Israeli nuclear policy, precipitated by more popularly led Arab regimes and Iran's nuclear ambitions, however, could make the Arab world recognize their military inferiority and force them to puff out their chests, so to speak.
Although Cohen does not believe a nuclear-armed Iran would be an existential threat to Israel as claimed by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, he believes the prospect would be very significant.
In Cohen's opinion, "There's no question that it would challenge, in a very critical way, the Israeli posture of national security. It could give a sense of confidence to Iran's proxies, Syria, Hezbollah and perhaps Hamas. It can create a situation that Iran would be much more assertive and aggressive in trying to dominate the region.
The secret policy may also be forced to change for other reasons.
Cohen believes that because amimut is "incompatible
with the vasic values of democracy, the time has come to revisit,
reexamine and perhaps relax this policy." He added, "Part
of this book is an effort, a plea, to start a discussion and
gradually move away from that policy."
|Top|
BRETTON WOODS, N.H.—When this AMERICAN FREE PRESS writer—accompanied by photographer Stephen Lombardo—finally reached the sleepy enclave of Bretton Woods in northern New Hampshire on Sunday, April 10, there was no immediate outward sign that top bankers, former federal officials, former foreign officials, academics and select journalists were holed up in the historic Mount Washington Hotel to monkey with the world's financial machinery. There were no television news crews camped along the long drive off of Highway 302 to give viewers a glimpse of this meeting—known as Bretton Woods II.
Neither The Boston Globe nor The New York Times carried anything prominent in their pages during the April 8-11 conference. Ditto for The Wall Street Journal. And their web sites showed nothing as of April 11. But the first Bretton Woods conference in 1944 gave the world nothing less than the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. So a second Bretton Woods conference should have made huge waves.
The world is going through the most serious financial convulsions in modern history, yet this 2011 meeting was all but ignored. In contrast, the 1944 meeting was heavily covered by the press.
Dave Gahary interviews AFP roving editor Mark Anderson, who discusses his covering of the George Soros-sponsored economic conference, Bretton Woods II, held at the same elite hotel world leaders met at in 1944 to mold the post-war economic architecture.
Near the hotel around 1 p.m., the only evidence that something unusual was afoot—besides polished black sedans that later appeared—were small signs scattered around that stated things like, "Soros, Enemy of U.S.," and "Soros, Take a Hike," referring to internationalist billionaire George Soros, whose Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET) was endowed with $50 million and put on this second-ever Bretton Woods conference.
The sign man, Cliff, spent several hours calling attention to the global-scale scheming happening inside the hotel. Another protester, Joe Barton, told AFP that his sign on state property (not hotel land) 100 feet from the security detail was taken by hotel security and never returned. The local police chief, Barton alleged, drew his nightstick and heatedly warned Barton to stay away.
One could argue that a private organization like INET ought to be able to rent an entire hotel and discuss whatever they want. But the identity and affiliations of the participants (see additional story on pages 10-11 in this issue) strongly suggest that today's recommendations could well become tomorrow's legislation. When private talks lead to public decisions, playing the private card does not hold water.
Local residents and visitors hesitated to comment when informed of the conference. But Mark Catalano knew the conference's basic nature and plans to distribute AFP on a regular basis at his Twin Mountain Trading Post and at Living Water Campground.
Several hotel staffers, with their jobs on the line if they talked too much, said conference participants would take a break, say little among themselves, and return to another session with the doors barred. Staffers had to immediately leave the conference area after they served the esteemed guests so the staff would not hear anything.
Obviously, attendees did not want to be filmed or interviewed under any circumstance by media beyond their control.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
Americans who are fed up with what many perceive to be President
Barack Obama's intransigence toward Israel will find a refreshing
alternative in 2012 if Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) manages
to capture the Republican Party's presidential nomination.
The attractive, outspoken congresswoman—founder of the Tea Party Caucus in the House of Representatives—is an aggressive, no-holds-barred supporter of the Zionist nation. She has taken Obama to task, asserting that "the Obama administration has decided to . . . leave Israel to face the world alone, effectively abandoning our longtime friend and ally when they need us the most." Mrs. Bachmann told one interviewer of her special passion for Israel:
I have been a longtime supporter of Israel. The first time I went to Israel was the day I graduated from high school. I spent a summer working on Kibbutz Beeri near Beersheba in 1974. I've been four times in Israel—three times as a member of Congress. I loved Israel—from the moment I first landed. . . . I am honored to be in a position where I can help Israel. I have a tremendous love for Israel, and great admiration for the Israeli people.
Now serving in only her third term in the House of Representatives—first elected in 2006 following three terms in the Minnesota state Senate—the 55-year-old congresswoman has skyrocketed quickly to national fame and is much talked about in the mainstream media.
Even the liberal New Republic magazine has acknowledged that Mrs. Bachmann is a "serious contender" for the GOP presidential nod.
Already, in an early straw poll in New Hampshire, Mrs. Bachmann
ran
fifth in a field of 20 names, out polling former House Speaker
New Gingrich and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani.
In private life, Mrs. Bachmann and her husband Marcus have five children, have been foster parents to 23 others and are the owners of a Christian counseling clinic. Mrs. Bachmann is generally identified as a "Christian conservative," and associated in particular with hardline dispensationalists Tim and Beverly LaHaye, who look forward to Armageddon and who are said to have inspired Mrs. Bachmann's political activism.
Having studied advanced tax law, Mrs. Bachmann served from 1988 to 1993 as a U.S. Treasury Department attorney in the U.S. Federal Tax Court in St. Paul, where, by her own admission, she prosecuted and sought to send to jail "hundreds" of people charged with underpaying or failing to pay their taxes.
Now ensconced on Capitol Hill, where she founded the Tea Party Caucus in the House of Representatives, Mrs. Bachmann has become a major media figure and political power player.
Unlike a lot of politicians who proclaim their support for Israel as a way to pander to the owners of the big media and to wealthy pro-Israel campaign contributors— who bankroll an estimated 70 percent to 80 percent of the national finances of both major parties—Mrs.Bachmann has a real and passionate devotion to Israel.
A member of a fundamentalist offshoot of the traditional Lutheran Church, Mrs. Bachmann has said, "I am a Christian, but I consider my heritage Jewish because it is the foundation, the roots, of my faith as a Christian." So her support for Israel is philosophically based and not just political rhetoric. Speaking before the Republican Jewish Coalition, Mrs. Bachmann described her views:
We have to show that we are inextricably entwined, that as a nation we have been blessed because of our relationship with Israel, and if we reject Israel, then there is a curse that comes into play. My husband and I are both Christians, and we believe very strongly the verse from Genesis 12:3, we believe very strongly that nations also receive blessings as they bless Israel. It is a strong and beautiful principle.
Mrs. Bachmann and other friends of Israel on Capitol Hill even introduced a resolution in the House—backed by nearly half of the members of the Tea Party Caucus—urging Israel "to use all means necessary to confront and eliminate nuclear threats posed by the Islamic Republic of Iran, including the use of military force."
In that regard, although Mrs. Bachmann has said that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad "announced his intention to bomb the state of Israel," she was mistaken. He never made such a threat.
Like all people, Mrs. Bachmann makes errors, and this was one of a number of her gaffes, which have made her all the more down to earth and endearing to her supporters.
For example, Mrs. Bachmann referred to the Smoot-Hawley Act—which instituted much needed protective tariffs supported by American nationalists—as "Hoot-Smawley," generating much laughter. Mrs. Bachmann also claimed the law was brought into being by President Franklin D. Roosevelt when, in fact, it was the work of two Republicans—Sen. Reed Smoot (Utah) and Rep. William Hawley (Ore.)—and signed into law in 1930 under GOP President Herbert Hoover.
What concerns purists who expect public officials to know the issues is that Mrs. Bachmann falsely claimed tariffs made the nation's already precarious economy worse: A variety of historians have exploded that myth put forth by internationalist free traders.
Mrs. Bachmann also puzzled serious readers when she made the strange claim she stopped being a Democrat and turned Republican when she read a book by novelist Gore Vidal that she felt made light of America's Founding Fathers. Anyone who knows anything about Vidal's novels about American history knows Vidal celebrates—rather than demeans—America's founders.
Mrs. Bachmann's bias against Vidal may also arise from the fact that Vidal has been a vocal critic of Israel and its lobby in America, and has also questioned the U.S. government's official version of the Oklahoma City bombing. In addition, Vidal's novels paint the America-first, noninterventionist movement in a positive light in stark contrast to Mrs. Bachmann's internationalist views.
Mrs. Bachmann's views on religion have also raised eyebrows, including her possible hostility to Roman Catholicism. Mrs. Bachmann's church is affiliated with the small Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS), which states clearly on its website that it believes the papacy "is the antichrist." When confronted, Mrs. Bachmann insisted it was "absolutely false" that WELS considers the papacy to be the anti-Christ. Perhaps Mrs. Bachmann had not read the website.
A journalist specializing in media critique, Michael Collins Piper is the author of The High Priests of War, The New Jerusalem, Dirty Secrets, The Judas Goats, The Golem, Target Traficant and My First Days in the White House All are available from AFP.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
A shadowy group with ties to U.S. defense and intelligence agencies is seeking thousands of Americans to participate in a multiyear study at taxpayers' expense that will be tasked with trying to predict the future.
Sponsored by the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA), a division of the office of the director of national intelligence, the Forecasting World Events Project plans to assemble five competing panels whose members will make predictions about future events and global trends. According to the project's website, their objective is to investigate the accuracy of individual and group predictions that could lead to fundamental advances in the science of forecasting.
This is the latest in a series of off-the-wall experiments IARPA has launched since its creation in 2007. The cost to taxpayers remains unknown at this time, as the program is classified. But it is not hard to speculate that it will cost the United States tens of millions of dollars, at least, before it is shut down. IARPA is the intelligence community's version of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), a Pentagon undertaking responsible for introducing an Orwellian domestic spying program known as Total Information Awareness (TIA). This program was a massive data mining operation that utilizes ultra large scale computers to track the movements of millions of American citizens in an attempt to identify patterns consistent with alleged terrorist activity.
In 2003, DARPA proposed its own forecasting project called the Policy Analysis Market for Terrorism. The plan was to establish an online trading venue whereby investors could speculate on future political and economic turmoil in the Middle East—such as coups, assassinations and terrorist attacks.
The organization that has been awarded taxpayer dollars to conduct IARPA's forecasting project is MITRE, a Maryland based "not-for-profit" mercenary firm whose board chairman is former Defense Secretary James Schlesinger.
Schlesinger is a notorious fear-monger and advocate for the "war on terror" whose hawkish ideology can be summed up in his 1997 address to the Council on Foreign Relations regarding the CIA's future:
"Today the intelligence community is under assault partly because of a natural complacency after the end of the Cold War in which the American people believe that we in this country are unthreatened," opined Schlesinger.
During his tenure as defense secretary under Gerald Ford, Schlesinger insisted on higher war budgets and no compromise negotiations with the Soviets. His harsh criticism of certain dovish congressional members ultimately led to his dismissal.
Schlesinger's not-for-profit outfit came under public scrutiny in September 2004 when former DARPA employee Indira Singh testified before the 911 Commission and identified MITRE as one of two technology contractors that had unique access to systems capable of disabling NORAD and disrupting American air defenses during Sept. 11, 2001.
"Ptech [software company—Ed.] was with MITRE Corporation in the basement of the FAA for two years prior to 911," Singh said. "Their specific job is to look at interoperability issues the FAA had with NORAD and the Air Force in the case of an emergency. If anyone was in a position to know the FAA—that there was a window of opportunity to insert software or to change anything—it would have been Ptech along with MITRE."
MITRE is also the last place of employment for John P. Wheeler III, a former CFR member and aide to Ronald Reagan. Wheeler's dead body was found in a Delaware landfill earlier this year. Less than a week before his death, Wheeler emailed a close friend expressing concern that the United States wasn't sufficiently prepared for cyber-warfare, suggesting he was involved in one of MITRE's many cyber-intelligence projects.
To gain insight into what MITRE may be trying to accomplish with its forecasting project, AFP consulted Phillip Giraldi, a former CIA station chief who now serves as executive director of the Council for the National Interest. He is also a respected columnist and television commentator whose works regularly appear on news websites, among other places.
"The U.S. government is fixated with matrixing and mathematical analysis," said Giraldi. "What they're trying to do is get a broad database with as many inputs as they can. . . . The theory here is that the unlettered and the unschooled and the unsophisticated—if you take a great mass of them, and pool their perceptions, you will find that their perceptions can be of value."
But overall, Giraldi doesn't see much promise in the project. Giraldi said that most in the intelligence community roll their eyes in regard to such programs.
"When I served in the agency, we referred to it as the flavor of the week," he said. "Every so often, someone would come up with an idea, and if they were high enough in the food chain, that idea would become manifest. Whenever that happened, you just dealt with it until somebody realized the idea was stupid."
Keith Johnson is an independent journalist and the editor of "Revolt of the Plebs," an alternative news website that can be found at RevoltofthePlebs.com.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003American
Free Press
|Top|
The investigation, if it can properly be so called, of the unsolved murder of the former high ranking Pentagon official and presidential advisor John P. Wheeler III, who was also an expert on chemical and biological weapons, may be taking a turn in the direction of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Wheeler, 67, a West Point grad, was beaten and thrown into a garbage dumpster. His body was discovered in a Wilmington, Del. landfill last New Year's weekend. Both police detectives and news commentators described it as "an apparent hit," but little else was ever learned, and no suspects have surfaced.
There was great speculation by many at the time that Wheeler had begun to blow the whistle on the mysterious bird and fish deaths in Arkansas and Texas, and was about to expose the facts tying this to the chemtrails seen in our skies over the past decade.
Now the speculation may be reverting to British Petroleum and the gulf spill because a number of other BP whistle blowing scientists, before and since the Wheeler murder, have also died mysteriously, been jailed on questionable charges or disappeared without a trace.
Matthew Simmons, 67, a former energy advisor to President George W. Bush and admired among survivalist groups for his dire warnings on the upcoming commodity and fuel shortages about to hit this nation, died in his hot tub in Maine last August. Simmons had been gaining popularity as a whistle blower for blaming BP for its covered-up responsibility in defacing and vandalizing the Gulf of Mexico while hiding the truth from the general public.
Only four days later, Ted Stevens, the 87-year-old defrocked senator from Alaska, said to have received communications regarding BP's faulty blowout preventer, perished in a plane crash. British Petroleum had donated $1 million to the University of Alaska to catalog the papers from Stevens's long political career.
Roger Grooters began a cross country bike ride in Oceanside, Calif. on Sept. 10 to draw attention to the Gulf Coast oil disaster. On Oct. 6, in front of the horrified eyes of his wife, who was trailing in a support vehicle, Grooters was struck by a truck and killed instantly in Panama City, Fla.
Only a month later, Dr. Geoffrey Gardner of Lakeland, Fla. disappeared. He was investigating the unexplained bird deaths near Sarasota that are suspected to have been caused by the BP oil disaster. No one has heard from or spoken with him since.
On Nov. 15, Chitra Chaunhan was found dead of cyanide poisoning in a Temple Terrace, Fla. hotel. It was officially ruled a suicide. She worked in the Center for Biological Defense and Global Health Infectious Disease Research and left behind a husband and five-year-old child.
The following week, James Patrick Black, director of operations for BP's restoration organization for the oil spill, died near Destin, Fla. in a small plane crash.
Dr. Thomas B. Manton was one of the first to warn the public that far more oil than what BP had reported was gushing into the gulf every day and that the massive, toxic oil and chemical plumes would travel up the eastern seaboard, contaminating beaches and wildlife all the way.
"Once the winds change, it will come eastward and pollute the beaches of the west coast of Florida, and the ‘loop current' could carry this oil spill right around Florida, through the Florida Keys and pollute the east coast of Florida as well," Manton wrote on May 28, 2010.
Dr. Tom Termotto, national coordinator of the Gulf Oil Spill Remediation Conference, says Manton was murdered in prison. Manton had been sentenced to 15 years last August on a phony child pornography charge. Termotto and others say evidence was planted on his computer.
It is not known whether or not Anthony Nicholas Tremonte, 31, posed any threat to BP, but he too was arrested in January and charged with one count of possession of child pornography. Was this charge also faked? As an officer with the Mississippi Department of Marine Resources on the Gulf Coast, he may have known enough to qualify him for membership in this exclusive series of coincidences. He faces up to 40 years in prison if convicted.
Pat Shannan is a contributing editor of American Free Press. He is also the author of several videos and books including One in a Million: An IRS Travesty, I Rode With Tupper and Everything They Ever Told Me Was a Lie. All of Pat's books are available from FIRST AMENDMENT BOOKS. Call 202-547-5585 for availability and pricing.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
Israel has exploited the global fixation with the Libyan crisis to break a range of international laws while it secretly weighs the benefits of launching a second attack on Palestinians in Gaza or starting another war against Hezbollah in Lebanon.
The laws Israel has broken range from the planned construction of hundreds more Jewish settler homes on Palestinian land to the launching of a missile attack inside the African country of Sudan.
The Sudan attack, which killed two men in a car near Sudan's main port city, Port Sudan, was carried out using American-made Apache helicopters, which fired missiles that are typically used only by Israel.
The Sudanese government said it was an infringement of its territorial integrity. Before the attack, Israel blocked radar Sudan uses to track civilian aircraft in its airspace. Some experts said the move could have led to a midair collision and exemplified Israel's cynical use of military power.
It was the second time in two years the Israeli military carried out attacks within Sudan. In 2009, it used missiles to target a convoy of cars it claimed were part of an arms smuggling operation.
Israel's intelligence agency, Mossad, has also been busy running one of its familiar kidnapping operations, This time abduction a Palestinian engineer, Dirar Abu Sisi, in Ukraine and secretly transporting him to Israel. Sisi was responsible for redesigning Gaza's only electrical power plant to run on diesel supplied by Egypt, making it less reliant on Israeli fuel supplies. His wife who is Ukrainian, claims her husband was in her country applying for citizenship for him and his children because he thought Gaza was too dangerous for his family.
On Feb. 19,2011, Sisi vanished after being taken from a train by two men, claiming to be Ukrainian state security agents. The Ukrainian government denied involvement in his disappearance and referred the matter to the UN. On April 4, 2001, Sisi reappeared in a court in Israel, charged with being a Hamas rocket specialist. The Israelis alleged Hamassent him to Ukraine to study Scud missile technology. The Palestinian authority said his abduction was yet another classic example of Israel committing international crimes.
MORE ATTACKS AGAINST PALESTINIANS
Meanwhile, Israel has launched missile attacks on Gaza that have killed Hamas members and injured scores f civilians, including children. The excessive use of Israeli fire power, allegedly a response to a recent Palestinian rocket attack that injured an Israeli boy, signaled a growing desire by the Israeli government to launch another Gaza attack.
However, such a move would draw the ire of surrounding Arab states and condemnation by Turkey and EU nations. Turkey has made it clear to Washington it will, under no circumstances, normalize relations with Israel while it acts like a bloodthirsty bully.
Were Israel to launch an Operation Cast Lead II invasion of Gaza, Israeli officials contend they would likely face retaliation from Hezbollah in Lebanon. And with that in mind, there are signs Israel is preparing to start another war with Hezbollah, which beat back the Israeli military in 2006.
In a move that smacks of Israel justifying military action before it begins, the Israeli military circulated a map it says shows 1,000 Hezbollah underground sites in Lebanon. It claims the sites are for weapons storage and forward targeting and are in 270 villages beside civilian facilities, including schools and hospitals. In other words, if Israel bombs the sites in the near future, causing massive civilian casualties, it will say it warded Hezbollah not to put the lives of ordinary Lebanese in harm's way by locating its facilities near civilian structures.
Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallahhas warned he will
send forces into Israel if it attacks Lebanon. He also made it
clear he possesses rockets capable of striking Tel Aviv.
|Top|
Even though southwest airlines has a sound safety record, and its preferred aircraft, the Boeing 737, is a dependable workhorse, the recent discovery of cracks in five of the fleet's planes didn't come as a surprise to industry insiders.
The issue of whether structural stress of aircraft is accelerated because of so-called short-haul duty has been moved front and center in the news ever since an April 1 incident in which a five-foot section of southwest Flight 812'sfuselage was peeled back along the top of the737-300 jet.
The rupture immediately depressurized the cabin, forcing crew members to nose the plane into a controlled dive of 20,000 feet in less than five minutes. The jetliner, en route from Phoenix to Sacramento, sustained no further damage and made an emergency landing in a military base in Yuma, Ariz. With no injuries to the 115 aboard.
This plane had already logged 39,000 pressurization cycles, each representing one takeoff and landing, which translates into 7.2 cycles per day for the 15 years it has been in service.
According to a Southwest fact sheet, the average trip length is 648 miles, with the average duration being under two hours. Those numbers give southwest one of the highest utilization rates in the industry. On average, Southwest's planes are 11.2 years old and fly six trips per day.
Two pilots, each of whom flies fro a major commercial carrier with hubs in the East, spoke to AFP about southwest on condition of anonymity.
One pilot said, "They fo a good job. But in the back of my mind, I wondered when that kind of flying would take a toll on their fleet.
The other pilot said, "They do things a little different
than everybody else, which, in some cases, I consider dangerous.
There's a pay incentive for them to fly as fast as they can.
In my mind, that's necessarily going to stress the airplanes
even more over the long haul."
|Top|
Amid the hoopla, showboating and innuendo surrounding billionaire Donald Trump's recent media blitz where he's been questioning the validity of Barack Obama's birth certificate, the New York real estate tycoon made an amazingly insightful comment.
"There's something on that birth certificate President Obama doesn't want people to see," Trump declared with bravado during a successive three-night appearance with Fox News commentator Bill O'Reilly.
On Apr. 7,Trump sat down with NBC morning show host Meredith Viera to further elaborate on his suspicions. "I'm not convinced that Obama has a birth certificate," said Trump. "His grandmother in Kenya said he was born in Kenya, and she was there and witnessed the birth. He doesn't have a birth certificate, or he hasn't shown it. He has what's called a ‘certificate of live birth' issued eight days after the birth. It's not the equivalent of a birth certificate because it doesn't have a serial number, or even a signature by anybody.
Trump continued, "Obama has spent $2 million in legal fees trying to get away from this issue. If he wasn't lying, why doesn't he just solve it and show his birth certificate? If he doesn't, it's one of the greatest scams in the history of politics."
The high-profile entrepreneur next commented on sending two investigators to Hawaii.
"I have people who are studying it," he said, "and they're not believing what they're finding."
To prove his tenacity, on April 8 in Manhattan Trump met with Rep. Carl Seel (R-Ariz.), who is backing H.B. 2177 that is currently moving through Arizona's Legislature. The Arizona bill would require every presidential candidate to present a certified birth certificate before his name could appear on any ballot.
MOTIVE BEHIND OBAMA'S BIRTH CERTIFICATE MYSTERY
Although speculation has centered on whether Obama was born in Hawaii or Krnya, the real heart of this matter lies not in where he was delivered, but rather the identity of his actual father.
As this author's book Frontman
Obama's Darkest Secrets Revealed* carefully details, the best
evidence points to a communist "poet" named Frank Marshall
Davis as the man who got Obama's mother, the 18-year-old Stanley
Ann Dunham, pregnant.
Rivero explained: "Obama wants to keep his birth certificate hidden because the name of his father is different than Barack Hussein Obama Sr. My theory is that the original birth certificate lists Frank Marshall Davis as his father."
As Obama's handlers began grooming him for political office decades ago, they realized that their candidate being an illegitimate child was the least of their concerns. However, they could never allow the public to discover that Davis was an avowed communist investigated by the FBI, the House Un-American Activities Committee and the Commission on Subversive Activities.
Further, Davis penned an autobiographical pornography book entitled Sex Rebel: Memoirs of a Gash Gourmet where he recounts episodes of pedophilia, homosexual encounters and a varietyof other acts unprintable in this newspaper. Davis referred to his authorship of Sex Rebel in the following terms: "All incidents I have described have been taken from actual experiences."
After boasting of his preoccupation with bedding white women, Davis tells of a sexual encounter with an underaged girl named "Anne."
Obama's mother, Stanley Ann, moved with her family to Hawaii in the summer of 1960 after graduating from high school. Since Barack Obama was born on Aug.4, 1961, his mother would have conceived in November 1960, which fits into the Hawaiian time line.
High school classmate Susan Blake described Stanley Ann, a provocative teen reared by unconventional parents, as a girl "who never dated crew-cut white boys." Obama himself confirmed her predilections in his autobiography where he noted the discomfort he experienced whenever his mother talked about black men.
The possibility that Davis and Stanley Ann met gained significant cridibility when, on Oct. 21, 2008, genealogical researcher Paul Bearden discovered nude photographs taken of Obama's mother. In Bearden's original October 2008 emails obtained by this writer from Dr. John Ray, Bearden conjectures that the photos were taken in Hawaii by "a mature man who knows what he likes, including young girls." Some people, however, claim the photos are not of Obama's mother but are instead of a model, Marcy Moore. Others say Moore's resemblance to Ms. Dunham is striking, but clearly it is not Moore in the photos.
Additionally, Davis moved with his white wife to Hawaii in 1948. At his precious residence in Chicago, he was the founder of a photography club. Davis was originally born in Kansas, as were Stanley Ann's parents, who also had affiliations with the American Communist Party.
In Hawaii, Davis and the Dunhams developed a close relationship. Gerald Horne, a University of Houston history professor who also contributed to a Communist Party journal, said that Davis "came into contact with Barack Obama and his family and became the young man's mentor."
In his autobiography, Dreams From My Father, Obama identified his childhood mentor as a man named "Frank."
A close friend, Dawna Weatherly-Williams, confirmed that Davis "knew Stan [Obama's grandfather] real well," even acknowledging that they smoked marijuana together. Research also shows that Mrs. Dunham let her husband carouse with Davis.
By all accounts, she said, "after Obama's mother abandoned him to live with his grandparents [the Dunhams] in Hawaii in 1970, Obama and Frank Marshall Cavis developed what was characterized as a "father-son relationship."
A FAUX MARRIAGE OF CONVENIENCE?
What are we to make of Stanley Ann Dunham's alleged marriage to the Kenyan Barack Obama Sr.? In an aug. 16 2009 article entitled "Obama Mamma: Six Lost Months," Jerome Corsi pointed out fur glaring inconsistencies to their questionable wedding: 1)No photographs of Dunham's wedding to Barack Obama Sr. Have ever been published; 2)No marriage certificate for the couple has ever been found or published; 3)No photographs have yet surfaced of the parents with Barack Obama Jr. At the hospital where he was born; and 4)No Photographs have yet surfaced of the parents after the newly born infant was taken home.
In Dreams From My Father, Obama wrote of his parents' supposed betrothal: "There's no record of a real wedding, a cake, a ring, a giving away of the bride. No families were in attendance. The whole thing seems so fragile in retrospect, so haphazard."
It almost seems as if the entire affair was erratically thrown together in order to cover up a scandal or to hide somebody's identity. Frank Marshal Davis was already married to another white woman at the time.
OBAMA'S DARKEST SECRETS
As a 10-year-old boy discarded by his mother and taken under the wing of the much older Frank Mashall Davis, a self-admitted pedophile and drug-using deviant, it is this writer's contention that Barack Obama may have in fact been sexually abused by Davis, the same man who impregnated his teenage mother during one of his many conquests.
Obama himself described in Dreans From My Father how, as a youth, he would drink whishey with Davis and then engage in composing "dirty limericks."
Also, as a coming-of-age exhibition of Obama's talent that he learned from Davis, Obama, at the time a 19-year-old freshman at Occidental College, had a poem called "Pop" published in a student journal. A close reading of this poem indicates that it is in reference to Davis and contains allusions to pedophilia.
Even stranger, Larry Sinclair has related on numerous occasions, even at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., his homosexual encounters with Obama on Nov. 6 and 7, 1999. In two different interviews with this writer, Sinclair described in detail the circumstances and specific events surrounding these trysts. Sinclair eventually authored a book entitled Barack Obama & Larry Sinclair: Cocaine, Sex, Lies & Murder. In this tell-all, he provides scores of scintillating details, again, many of which are not printable in this newspaper.
A COMPLETE MYSTERY
Hidden from inspection are Obama's birth certificate, college transcripts, work history, his CIA affiliations, mysterious overseas travel records, conflicting Social security numbers, faked years at Columbia University and friendships with some of Chicago's seediest political mobsters.
Practically his entire life is a lie concealed by smoke and mirrors. Worse, every person from his past, who could reveal his secrets, is dead, including his grandfather (1992), mother (1995), alleged Kenyan father (1982), and Frank Marshall Davis (1987). Even Obama's Hawaiian grandmother died one day before the 2008 presidential election.
Journalist Mike Rivero provides further anecdotal evidence of another slip Obama made where he mentioned during a June 28, 2008 speech to the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials that his father served in World War II. Rivero notes, however, "Obama sr. and later Seotoro [his mother's second husband] were too young to serve in WWII. The far older Davis did in fact serve in WWII.
*Frontman: Obama's Darkest Secrets Revealed by Victor Thorn.
Softcover, 112 pages, #0, $20 plus $3 S&H. Call 1-888-699-NEWS
toll free to charge to a major credit card or send payment to
American Free Press, 645 Pennsyllvania Avenue SE, #100, Washington,
D.C. 20003. Add #3 S&H in the U.S. See more at americanfreepress.net.
|Top|