Sunday, September 11, 2011

Iran Pledges to Retaliate Against Potential Strike

Iranian Ambassador to UN Mohammad Khazaee puts France, the United States and other Western powers on notice

Global Security News
09/09/2011

Iran fully intends to retaliate against any enemy military action within its borders, the country's ambassador to the United Nations said on Thursday in an official communication to the body's top officials (see GSN, Sept. 8).

   Ambassador Mohammad Khazaee issued the grievance in response to remarks by French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who last week said the Middle Eastern state's "military, nuclear and ballistic ambitions constitute a growing threat that may lead to a preventive attack against Iranian sites that would provoke a major crisis that France wants to avoid at all costs."

Iranian Zelzal missile launch outside the city of Qom, Iran
 France, the United States and other Western powers suspect Iran's nuclear program is intended to help establish a weapon capability, a charge Tehran has consistently denied.

Iran would "not hesitate to act in self defense to respond to any attack against the Iranian nation," Agence France-Presse quoted Khazaee as saying in an admonition to the U.N. Security Council and Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. Khazaee added his nation would "take appropriate defensive measures to protect itself."

    The Iranian envoy accused the French president of airing "inflammatory remarks and baseless allegations."
"The Islamic Republic of Iran expresses its deep concern over, and strong condemnation of such a provocative, unwarranted and irresponsible statement against Iran," Khazaee said.

    "Iran is a leading nation in rejecting and opposing all kinds of weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons," he added. "Moreover I wish to reiterate my government's position that the Islamic Republic of Iran has no intention to attack any other nations" (Agence France-Presse/Google News, Sept. 9).
France said the five permanent Security Council member nations and Germany should demand that Iran move beyond merely issuing rhetoric over the nuclear standoff, Interfax reported on Thursday.

Sarkozy
The six world powers -- China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States -- convened talks with Iran on two separate occasions in December and January, but neither gathering yielded clear progress toward resolving a long-running dispute over Iranian atomic activities (see GSN, Jan. 24).

European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton has since attempted to renew the stalled diplomatic process.

"We have yet to receive a reply to a letter, written by Catherine Ashton on behalf of the [P-5+1] and handed over to Iran in July. Since Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi last visited Moscow, Iran has continued making provocative statements," French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe told Interfax.

    "In this connection the sextet must work out a serious and clear-cut approach: all of us are responsible for regional stability and nonproliferation of nuclear weapons," the minister said.

    "The sextet has taken the first step. While imposing sanctions it proposed starting a dialogue on aiding Iran in promoting its civilian nuclear program and on Iran's efforts to create an atmosphere of trust. The Iranian authorities must back these proposals with concrete action, not merely by words or meetings that have no content," he said (Interfax, Sept. 8).

    Meanwhile, U.S. Senators Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) and Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) are pursuing a legislative measure to bar U.S. firms and their affiliates in breach of punitive measures targeting Iran from receiving Export-Import Bank assistance. The provision, included in the Export-Import Bank Reauthorization Act, would also prohibit export aid for international initiatives with managing entities that contravene penalties against Iran.

U.S. Senator Robert Menendez
 “It is important that we use every opportunity and channel to impede Iran’s relentless drive to develop nuclear weapons. The new Iran sanctions law passed by Congress in 2010 and the Obama administration’s efforts to impose multilateral sanctions have made a difference, but Iran’s mullahs are persistent," Menendez said in a statement. "As long as Iran continues on her march toward nuclear weapons, we will continue to expand and enhance our efforts to stall and thwart her achievement," he added.

    Kirk added: "This amendment ensures that taxpayer dollars will not help the Iranian government avoid sanctions for building nuclear weapons."

    "We should now move beyond this step to the one recommended in August by 91 Senators: collapse the Central Bank of Iran," Kirk said in the press release (U.S. Senator Robert Menendez release, Sept. 8).

    Elsewhere, Saudi Arabia's rulers are split on whether to pursue a covert atomic effort for defense purposes, according to the French website Intelligence Online (see GSN, June 30). Under a plan backed by Defense Minister Sultan bin Abdul Aziz and former intelligence head Turki bin Faisal, the nation would recruit Pakistani support to establish a military atomic program that would contain Iranian ambitions, Haaretz reported on Thursday.

Defense Minister Sultan bin Abdul Aziz
Saudi officials including national security council head Bandar bin Sultan -- considered a proponent of a clandestine nuclear bomb drive -- have held talks with Pakistani atomic scientists who entered the Saudi Arabia as travelers to Mecca, according to the French report. Bandar also reportedly joined related talks several weeks ago with the leaders of a government-run uranium firm in Kazakhstan.

A separate contingent -- led by Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal and Interior Minister Naif bin Abdul -- favors relying on U.S. extended deterrence in response to a nuclear-armed Iran, according to the report (Yossi Melman, Haaretz, Sept. 8).

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.  We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

Cheney Claims Waterboarding "Produced Phenomenal Results"

Cheney says administration waterboarded only "a handful" of people

Think Progress
By Ben Armbruster
09/09/2011 at 6:00 pm

Dick Cheney wrapped up his book tour on home turf this morning at the American Enterprise Institute. The Weekly Standard’s Stephen Hayes — the official Cheney biographer and famous peddler of the false “connection” between Saddam Hussein’s Iraq and al Qaeda — moderated the event and eventually got to the sticky topic of torture. In what he called “a thoughtful critique,” Hayes asked Cheney to respond to those who argue “the things that we did amounted to torture and the sense that maybe the moral position of the United States was eroded because of the things that we did here in this country.”

    Cheney dismissed the question, saying they waterboarded only “a handful” of people, which, he claimed, “produced phenomenal results”:

War Criminal Cheney:  "So?"
 CHENEY:  "When we get into the whole area of one of the most controversial techniques, waterboarding. … Three people were waterboarded — not dozens, not hundreds. Three. And the one who was subjected most often to that was Khalid Sheik Mohammad and it produced phenomenal results for us."

There are reports that the intelligence committee did of the results of the program which were declassified at my request and are now available on the internet that talk about the quality of information that we got as a result of our enhanced interrogation techniques applied to a handful of individuals. We are talking about only a handful of people who were indeed part of the al Qaeda organization.

    The “reports” Cheney is presumably referring to are two CIA documents the agency released in 2009 — at Cheney’s request. However, they do not prove torture worked and in fact, they “actually suggest the opposite of Cheney’s contention: that non-abusive techniques actually helped elicit some of the most important information the documents cite in defending the value of the CIA’s interrogations.”

Waterboarding
The bottom line is that there is no evidence to support Cheney’s claim that torture “produced phenomenal results.” “What we got [from waterboarding] was pabulum,” said one FBI agent. A former senior CIA official said most of what came from waterboarding “was total f*cking bullsh*t.” “K.S.M. produced no actionable intelligence,” said another former Pentagon analyst.

    “[Cheney] fears being tried as a war criminal,” former top Colin Powell aide Col. Lawrence Wilkerson said last month, “This is a book written out of fear, fear that one day someone will ‘Pinochet’ Dick Cheney.’”

 
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.  We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

Dick Cheney Laughs At His War Crimes

On Fox News Sunday today, Dick Cheney laughed when asked about claims that he is afraid of being tried as a war criminal, but here are five reasons why he shouldn’t be laughing

Politicus USA 
By
09/04/2011

Chris Wallace:  When [Colin Powell] says ‘these are cheap shots and you’re wrong’…

Dick Cheney:  Obviously I disagree with him.

Wallace:  Anything you’d want to take back?

Cheney and Bush think War Crimes are amusing
Cheney:  No.

Wallace:  Powell’s former chief of staff Lawrence Wilkerson, I don’t know if you know this, has also weighed in. He says you’re worried about being tried as war criminal.

Cheney:  Well it’s news to me. I don’t pay a lot of attention to Mr. Wilkerson. I don’t know him. As far as I know I’ve never met the gentleman. I know he speaks out from time to time and that strikes me as a cheap shot.

Wallace:  Your heads not going to explode?

Cheney:  No.

    Here is a list of things that Dick Cheney finds it humorous that he might ever be tried for via Brainz.org:

1).  The Invasion of Iraq – In 2004 UN Secretary General Kofi Annan declared the US invasion of Iraq, “The US-led invasion of Iraq was an illegal act that contravened the UN charter.” The invasion was also in violation of the Nuremberg Charter.

Nuremberg WWII War Crimes Trials
2).  Mass Murder in Iraq – If the war was illegal, then the deaths that resulted from the US invasion were acts of murder.

3).  GITMO and Prisoner Abuse- Cheney and Bush contrived the notion of enemy combatants, then illogically claimed that Geneva Convention does not apply to enemy combatants. This opened the door to wide range of abuses of detainees.

4).  Torture- This is the easiest charge to prove against Bush administration officials Under US law and the Geneva Conventions torture is a war crime. The Bush administration has not only admitted to torturing people, but they have defended and praised torture as a vital national security tool, even though the evidence suggests that no reliable intelligence was ever acquired through torture.


Haditha
5).  Treason- The outing of Valarie Plame. Dick Cheney was the person who arranged for his loyal deputy Scooter Libby to leak the information that outed Valarie Plame as a CIA agent. To this day, Cheney is still angry at George W. Bush and other members of the administration for not pardoning Libby on their way out the door in 2008.
 
    Cheney should be afraid of being tried as a war criminal. Last year a complaint was filed in International Criminal Court (I.C.C.) against George W. Bush, Richard Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, George Tenet, Condi Rice, and Alberto Gonzales over the practice of extraordinary rendition. The complaint requested an investigation into the above mentioned Bush administration officials. 

   The reason why the Obama administration won’t prosecute the previous administration for war crimes is that it would be an expansion of executive power that would set a dangerous precedent. If Obama prosecutes Bush, then a future president would also have the power carry out the same kinds of prosecutions against previous administrations. 

Guantanimo Bay, Cuba  (GITMO)
Even though Bush administration officials deserve prosecution, there would be nothing standing in the way of future presidents carrying out political prosecutions. Prosecuting Bush administration officials could open the door to an undermining of the entire system of government. 

If warrants were ever issued for Bush or Cheney and they were arrested, this would present a much more interesting decision for the current administration in power. I suspect whether that administration was Democratic or Republican, they would stand by Bush or Cheney. 

    Cheney may be laughing now, but let’s see how many flights he takes that fly over ICC member country airspace. Dick Cheney is still the same coward that he always was, so it is a pretty safe bet that he won’t be taking many trips outside the good old USA.


This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.  We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

Bush Credits "The Work That Was Done" During "My Presidency" For Osama Bin Laden’s Death

Think Progress
By Ben Armbruster on Sep 9, 2011 at 10:19 am


Ex- President Bush sat down with USA Today to discuss the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks and his role in shaping U.S. policy in their aftermath. During the interview, Bush thought he’d take the opportunity to pat himself on the back for Osama bin Laden’s death:

    Bush said the events that led to the death of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in May began during his administration.

    “The work that was done by intelligence communities during my presidency was part of putting together the puzzle that enabled us to see the full picture of how bin Laden was communicating and eventually where he was hiding,” he said. “It began the day after 9/11.”

War Criminal Bush
The reality, of course, is that Bush’s attempts to capture or kill bin Laden were huge failures. While it’s been well documented that the Bush administration missed an opportunity to get bin Laden in Tora Bora in 2001, Bush himself subsequently stated publicly that he wasn’t spending much time thinking about getting him. “I truly am not that concerned about him. I am deeply concerned about Iraq,” Bush said in 2002, “I really just don’t spend that much time on him, to be honest with you.” Bush told reporters in 2006 that hunting the al Qaeda leader was “not a top priority use of American resources.”

    And in 2005, Bush shut down the CIA’s unit dedicated to finding bin Laden in order to shift resources to Iraq. “The Central Intelligence Agency has closed a unit that for a decade had the mission of hunting Osama bin Laden and his top lieutenants,” the New York Times reported in 2006, adding that resources “had been redirected from the hunt for Mr. bin Laden to the search for Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who was killed last month in Iraq.” When the right wing rushed to give Bush credit after bin Laden’s death in May, Think Progress produced this short video highlighting Bush’s failures:

    Soon after he took office, President Obama steered the U.S. on a course to end the war in Iraq and put resources back into finding bin Laden. “Shortly after I got into office,” Obama said in an interview after bin Laden’s death, “I brought [then-CIA director] Leon Panetta privately into the Oval Office and I said to him, ‘We need to redouble our efforts in hunting bin Laden down. And I want us to start putting more resources, more focus, and more urgency into that mission.’

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.  We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

Terrorist Bloopers

"Conspiracy theories" trotted out again in vain attempt to legitimize "Official Story" of 911 Inside Job

Irish Times Peter Murtage Repeats 911 "Official Story" Lies, Calls 911 Independent Investigator's Reports to Contrary "conspiracy theories"

The Irish Times
By Peter Murtage
09/10/2011

OPINION*

AMERICAN SOFTWARE consultant David Rostcheck did much like everyone else on the morning of September 11th, 2001. He spent his time glued to the television, watching the amazing events unfold in New York.

Rostcheck
But, after a while, he sat down to write an e-mail which he sent to USAttacked@topica.com, an internet forum set up by a now defunct outfit, list-a-day.com. Having committed his thoughts to keyboard, Rostcheck hit the send button at 3.12pm.

    “Ok, is it just me,” his e-mail began, “or did anyone else recognize that it wasn’t the airplane impacts that blew up the World Trade Center? To me, this is the most frightening part of this morning. I hope other people actually are catching this, but I haven’t seen anyone say it yet, so I guess I will. I guess being an engineer may make one more conscious of these things. . .”

     And then, in a further 600 or so words, Rostcheck went through the sequence of events, raising all sorts of questions before four concluding paragraphs.

    “There’s no doubt that the planes hit the building and did a lot of damage. But look at the footage – those buildings were *demolished*. To demolish a building, you don’t need all that much explosive but it needs to be placed in the correct places (in direct contact with the structural members) and ignited in a smooth, timed sequence. Someone had to have had a lot of access to all of both towers and a lot of time to do this.

    “This is pretty grim. The really dire part is – what were the planes for? If you’re going to demolish the building, what’s the point of the flashy display?

Towers go down
“The way they’re cutting the footage on the news now makes it look like the buildings crumbled soon after being hit by the planes, which is not true. They’ve also started slowing the clips from after the demolition explosion starts, so you don’t see the top of the building go first – but those who taped it, go back and look at the early first-run clips.
“If, in a few days, not one official has mentioned anything about the demolition part, I think we have a REALLY serious problem.”

And so, within just a few hours of the atrocity, the conspiracy genie was out of the bottle.

     Rostcheck’s role in the birth of the very many conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11 is detailed in a new book, The Eleventh Day – 9/11 the Ultimate Account, by Ireland-resident authors, husband and wife team Anthony Summers and Robbyn Swan. Rostcheck’s e-mail can be read at serendipity.li/wot/davidr.html.

    Since that day, conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11 have spread through the internet like wildfire. Type “9/11 conspiracy theories” into Google and you get 13.5 million results, as of yesterday. There is a blizzard of websites and bloggers, both proselytizing conspiracies and debunking them.

    The people who advance the theories (for which no supporting evidence has ever been adduced) appear to be an eclectic mix of academics, professionals (experts and so-called experts), amateurs and, quite simply, nuts. They are active and persistent: one of the most prominent, David Ray Griffin, a professor emeritus of philosophy and religion at the Claremont School of Theology in southern California, has written numerous articles and several books, including The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11.

Dr. David Ray Griffin
One of the most virulent in terms of spreading doubt about the official version of events (which is supported by several investigations, including that of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, known as the 9/11 Commission) is a film, or rather a series of films culminating in the 2009 version, entitled Loose Change 9/11: An American Coup.

    Loose Change believes the US government was behind the attacks and has lied about its involvement all along. Despite the fact that the film’s assertions have been refuted, with verifiable facts, by the commission’s report and by other independent investigators, including scientists and engineers, journalists and the testimony of eyewitnesses, the 2006 version of Loose Change was watched by more than four million people online within four months of its release.

  As Summers and Swan note, the conspiracy theories fall into two broad groupings. One has it that events that occurred on September 11th, 2001, had been planned by the US government and its agencies, and was executed in meticulous, perfect detail. The other postulates the notion that, having allegedly become aware an attack was coming, the government sat back cynically and allowed it happen.

    The explanations as to why the US government would act in either of these ways range from the improbable (it wanted a dramatic event so citizens would be meek as it whittled away their freedoms at home and waged war abroad), to the off-the-wall, ludicrous and offensive (the world is in the grip of a Zionist conspiracy; human remains were “planted” at each of the terror attack sites).

    In books and articles, a favored conspiracy theorist tactic is to plant an idea by raising a query, as opposed to advancing evidence. Thus Laura Knight- Jadczyk (co-author of a book entitled 9/11: The Ultimate Truth ) and Arkadiusz Jadczyk, who run the “Cassiopaean Experiment”, something they describe as “not your usual ‘metaphysical’ website”, have suggested no aircraft passengers died at the Pentagon – because there was no plane. “For all we know, human remains from two different sites could have been combined by FBI and military personnel.”

Pentagon damage
“For all we know” – a possibility is raised without any evidence; “could have been” a suggestion is advanced, again without any evidence. Could have been? Yes, but was it? No evidence is advanced but, as with most conspiracy theories, a seed has been planted.

    The fact is that from moments after the aircraft ploughed into the Twin Towers and to this day, a substantial number of Americans believe their government is, to put it at its mildest, implicated in the 9/11 atrocity – the mass murder of its own people.

    In August 2004, 49 per cent of New York city residents said they believed the government knew in advance of the attacks and failed to act. A July 2006 poll by Ohio State University found 36 per cent of respondents thought it “somewhat or very likely” that US officials participated in the attacks or took no action to stop them.

    Even today, fully one-third of 5,000 Americans polled this month by Zogby disagreed with the statement “the US government and its commissions have fully investigated the attacks of 9/11”. Fifty eight per cent agreed with the assertion; 9 per cent said they were not sure.

    So, what are the theories?

    The main one is that the Twin Towers collapsed not because the fires started by fuel from the crashed aircraft fatally weakened the structure but because of controlled explosions. According to the conspiracy, the explosives were placed in advance by US government agents and detonated according to plan.

Obviously cut beams
The next significant theory has it that no aircraft crashed into the Pentagon. What did, according to the theory, was a cruise missile fired by the US government.

United 93, the aircraft that crashed into a field in Pennsylvania when brave passengers rushed the hijack pilots, was actually shot down by a US government missile, goes the theory.

Further theories suggest insider trading in airline shares, thereby betraying prior knowledge of the attacks; that 4,000 Jews also had prior knowledge and did not turn up for work in the Twin Towers that morning; and that what people saw flying into the towers were remotely controlled, unmanned planes.

   FOR ANY OF these to be true, one has to accept the idea that the US government would conspire to murder an unknown number of its own citizens – some 3,000 as it turned out – and that those involved, a huge number on any estimation, all maintained absolute secrecy. Experience suggests that while conspiracies do indeed occur, governments and bureaucracies are notoriously incompetent and prone to leaks. Someone, somewhere will always tell.

    In the face of the massively improbable conspiracy scenario, some advocates go further: they say the body parts found in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania were not the remains of genuine victims but pieces of human flesh placed there by government agents. And for this to be true, the grieving families who lost loved ones in 9/11 have to be liars, have to be part of the conspiracy.

    Interestingly, the skeptical views in the US, albeit held by a minority, have an echo in Muslim countries, as recent research by the Washington-based Pew Institute found.

    In this year’s Pew survey on attitudes to 9/11, few among the Muslim public surveyed believe the atrocity was carried out by groups of Arabs. The highest percentage – 28 per cent – who believe Arabs were culpable for the 9/11 attacks is found in Lebanon. A similar proportion of Israeli Muslims (27 per cent) also say groups of Arabs conducted the attacks.

    “In the other predominantly Muslim countries surveyed, fewer than one in four Muslims accept that Arabs conducted the attacks on New York and Washington,” Pew notes. “Pakistanis and Turks are the most skeptical, with just 12 per cent and 9 per cent respectively, saying that groups of Arabs carried out the 9/11 terrorist acts.”

    In several of the Muslim nations for which there are recorded trends, skepticism has grown since 2006. Among Jordanians, the percentage of Muslims who believe Arabs were responsible for the terrorist acts has fallen 17 percentage points compared with five years ago. Over the same period, the percentage of Muslims in Egypt who accept that groups of Arabs carried out the attacks has declined 11 points, while in Turkey it has shrunk by 7 percentage points. In the case of Indonesia and Pakistan, opinions on the matter have changed little since 2006.
 
    WHY IS IT that a substantial number of people simply do not accept what most others, certainly in the West, believe to be true, based on what they can see and on assertions supported by verifiable evidence?

   Michael Shermer, one of America’s leading champions of science and a dedicated debunk-er of pseudo-scientific and supernatural claims, has tried to provide an answer.

  Michael Shermer
“Why do people believe in highly improbable conspiracies?” he wrote two years ago in Scientific American . “In previous columns I have provided partial answers, citing patternicity (the tendency to find meaningful patterns in random noise) and agenticity (the bent to believe the world is controlled by invisible intentional agents). Conspiracy theories connect the dots of random events into meaningful patterns and then infuse those patterns with intentional agency.

    Add to those propensities the confirmation bias (which seeks and finds confirmatory evidence for what we already believe) and the hindsight bias (which tailors after-the-fact explanations to what we already know happened), and we have the foundation for conspiratorial cognition.”

    Of course, the ultimate problem for those who question a conspiracy, is that such skepticism is proof positive, for the advocate of the conspiracy, that the skeptic is himself part of the conspiracy. . .

*  The 5th Estate corrected the Irish Times by labeling this story Opinion, as it is and somehow was listed under hard news, saving them future embarrassment.  We also copy edited this error-heavy rant, accept thanks from Mr. Murtage in advance and note his storytelling is about as accurate as his spelling and grammar.   And finally, there is no such thing as a "conspiracy theory."  This is a CIA/Rovian invention coined during the Bush administration to place an automatic negative, discrediting slant on any article or film deviating from the 9/11 "official story" in an attempt to discredit investigators, journalists and filmmakers.  As a multi-government policy (U.S, U.K), it has failed miserably - Ed.

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.  We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ANDREW KREIG: EXPERTS REJECT FIRE AS CAUSE FOR 9/11 WTC COLLAPSES

The real truth on 9/11 slowly continues to bleed out

 photo
Technical experts are mounting major challenges to official U.S. government accounts of how three World Trade Center skyscrapers collapsed in near-freefall after the 9/11 attacks 15 years ago.

Many researchers are focusing especially on the little-known collapse of

READ MORE >>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Geopolitics Of The United States, Part 1: The Inevitable Empire

The Empire and the inevitable fall of the Obama criminal regime

 photo
STRATFOR Editor’s Note: This installment on the United States, presented in two parts, is the 16th in a series of STRATFOR monographs on the geopolitics of countries influential in world affairs.

Like nearly all of the peoples of North and South America, most Americans are not originally from the territory that became the United States.

READ MORE >>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Geopolitics Of The United States Part 2: American Identity And The Threats of Tomorrow

A look back at 2011 predictions for the future in order to put events of today into perspective

 photo capitalism_zpsah78uy5p.jpg
We have already discussed in the first part of this analysis how the American geography dooms whoever controls the territory to being a global power, but there are a number of other outcomes that shape what that power will be like. The first and most critical is the impact of that geography on the American mindset.

READ MORE >>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


By Robert S. Finnegan

This e-mail outlines and confirms the acts of espionage against Indonesia and Indonesians by Akiko Makino and the others involved both in Kobe University and in AI Lab at University of Airlangga, Surabaya; Bahasa Indonesia original follows English translation...

READ MORE >>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

UPDATED 01/07/2015 : New Analysis Challenges Tamiflu Efficacy; Hong Kong Corona Virus Outbreak

UPDATED 01/07/2015 : FOX NEWS CORPORATE PHARMA SHILL MEGAN KELLY AND FOX NEWS QUACK DOCTOR NOW PUSHING TAMIFLU FOR PREGNANT WOMEN AND CHILDREN;

 photo TAMIFLU_small_zpssojx6okt.jpg
THE 5TH ESTATE UNEQUIVOCALLY WARNS THE PUBLIC NOT TO TAKE OR GIVE THIS PROVEN DANGEROUS, INEFFECTIVE DRUG TO ANYONE

Obama criminals now resulting to biowarfare in quest to destroy Chinese and ASEAN economy; "novel virus substrain" points directly to a Kawaoka / Fouchier / Ernala-Ginting Kobe lab virus weaponized and genetically altered to specifically target and infect the Asian population: Ribavirin...

READ MORE >>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


 photo WHO02_zpsplmhtlpr.jpg
The 5th Estate has just purchased a library on H5N1 "Novel" virus pandemics, there are dozens of PDF and Exel documents we feel will assist you in saving lives following intentional releases of the H5N1 and now MERS viruses; we will begin by printing those that appear to be extremely relevant here: H5N1 Kobe-Kawaoka-Ernala series continues soon with more "Smoking Gun" e-mails from Teridah Ernala to The 5th Estate . . .

READ MORE >>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


By Robert S. Finnegan

On October 12, 2002 the Indonesian island of Bali experienced a terrorist attack that rocked the world. It was unquestionably well-coordinated and executed, the largest in the country's history.

READ MORE >>