Saturday, December 29, 2018

TWITTER SUCKS: Censors More Conservatives, Independent Media

Twitter now locking and even altering accounts of Independent Media in an effort to smear conservatives and ANYONE that does not toe their Communist, LGBT pedophile party line  

By Rita Panahi

Twitter appears determined to destroy its own website by banning interesting, witty contributors who dare to be, shock horror, conservatives. The latest to be sent to Twitter gulag is Marine Corps combat veteran, radio host and political pundit Jesse Kelly.

Jack Dorsey: "Want some caaaanndy, little boy?"
The Twitter purge may have started with controversial far Right-wing accounts but as Kelly himself predicted in August, in a piece for the Federalist, it was never going to stop there:

Many on the left and the right gave a loud cheer last week when Alex Jones was banished from Facebook. Twitter later suspended him. While it is not surprising to see the jackals on the left cheer at the burning of books, one would hope folks on the right would look in the mirror and realize their time is coming soon. 

The leftists will not stop (and did not stop) at nutty Alex Jones, because they do not think you are much different from him. You rightly think your belief in immigration enforcement is much different than his disgusting conspiracy theory about Sandy Hook. 

But you must understand the left thinks you are both equally vile. They just knew Jones was the weak member of the herd. They could pick him off as a test run. Next they’re coming for you.

Proof of Twitter Nazi censorship tactics: First Twitter suspends and locks the account of The 5th Estate with no warning or reason other than blatant censorship of the truth, then Twitter alters the account language internally to make it appear to be Russian in origin and denies owner access to delete the account

The same people who ceded control of public education, the federal bureaucracy, the media, movies, and music to the left have once again found another hill not worth dying on. “It’s only social media,” they say. Yeah, fear not. Around 2.5 billion people use Facebook and Twitter. What’s the worst that can happen if we just let the left have them?

Kelly does not know why he was banned. Perhaps he committed the absurd new sin of "deadnaming" which Twitter has deemed an unforgivable act of hate.

There has long been a double standard on the platform that sees pugnacious conservative and Right-wing accounts culled while blue-tick progressives wishing death and disease on their political adversaries and indulging in the most outrageous smears are immune from censure.

Trying to convince sensible, productive adults to dip their toe in the Twitterverse can be a futile exercise particularly if they, like more than 90 per cent of the population, are somewhere Right of Sarah Hanson-Young on the political spectrum.

“Why would I want to waste my time on that cesspit?” is a common response.

One colleague, unmoved by my argument that Twitter can be useful, informative and fun if you just recognise its shortcomings, likened participating in the social media network to sticking your head in a filthy toilet.

But swimming in that toilet, among the social justice activists, sad trolls and celebrity watchers, are much of the mainstream and new media; one can’t underestimate Twitter’s influence on determining what you read or watch on the nightly news.

Pederast, necrophiliac, jug-eared sodomite: Dorsey is the epitome and face of globalist/elitist hegemony

For conservatives and genuine centrists to ignore the site only makes it more unrepresentative.

Trump has masterfully used the site to run rings around the bulk of the media, who seem incapable of understanding why he won. But one wonders whether his account would’ve survived were he not the leader of the free world. Last week, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey reinforced the worst impressions of him and the site by tweeting praise for a putrid piece of writing which advocates that conservatives be driven out of public life.

Doomed: Dorsey and his Twitter LGBT pestilent minions are doomed the minute Trump closes his account

The chilling truth is that Dorsey, and his like-minded Silicon Valley cohorts, have the power to silence those who don't share their worldview.

This news bureau 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.

Wednesday, December 26, 2018

Border Control In The West Saw Globalization Concede

Merkel, globalists, EU "elites" foiled in plan to destroy the European middle classes  


Since its onset, the European migration crisis has reshaped the way governments handle border control, while promises to put a halter upon mass migration have won elections and broken up political unions.

In the political realm, the approach of EU member states to dealing with illegal migrants on their shores and frontiers have varied significantly — from Angela Merkel's "open door policy" to Viktor Orban's "Europe is under invasion" perspective.

The German Chancellor has largely relied on the concept of a united Europe and sought to distribute refugees among all 28 EU member states and eventually eliminate the causes of the refugee inflow.

However, that plan hasn't quite panned out and by now it is increasingly becoming clear that other European states don't want to take on the burden, oppose the distribution of refugee quotas and prioritize security of their external borders over EU asylum policy. 

What was perceived as "temporary measures with respect to the influx of migrants" when the crisis broke out, doesn't justify "the so-called relocation compulsory quotas" that failed to work for a number of EU member states.

The voice of political and public discontent over the European Commission's Agenda of Migration is louder than ever, with a number of EU states push for border fortification and control, including Slovakia, Hungary, Czech Republic, Romania. Sweden announced at the very early stages of the crisis that it "simply couldn't do it anymore" in reference to receiving swarms of asylum seekers.

The reported rate of asylum denials by Finland recently revealed that out of the 11,400 migrants in the country, 9,000 had their applications denied.

The need to strengthen the Schengen Area borders amid political solutions and an overwhelming expectation by the majority of EU citizens that the bloc intervenes more in the protection of external borders than at present — indicate a U-turn on the open global order.

The tension between the right to free movement and the nation states' claim to defend their borders and control access to their territory has spread beyond the EU rules and legislation. Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and the United States announced they will not be signing the UN Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration pact — a non-binding agreement that reportedly aims to make migration safe and orderly amid issues of national sovereignty and international cooperation.

In the light of the pact and the feared migrant break-through at the border of Bosnia into Croatia, Slovenia recently provided firearms to its police officers to ensure adequate control of migration flows from the rest of Europe.

The will to curb immigration played a key role in pushing the United Kingdom over the edge, resulting in Brexit and the PM's promise to "end free movement once and for all." With illegal immigration come increased levels of human trafficking, deaths of people trying to reach the country of destination and prevalent cases of unsuccessful integration of incomers in European societies, leading to crime and social conflict.

Along with that, European countries of entry, Greece and Italy, exhausted by the influx of migrants have signalled numerously of their limited resources and unwillingness to keep bearing the burden of illegal immigration.

Even the Europhile government of Emmanuel Macron in France has passed in 2018 a tough new immigration law that shortens asylum application deadlines, doubles the time for which illegal migrants can be detained and introduces a one-year prison sentence for entering France illegally.

Control and prevention of illegal immigration are pervasive in modern political agenda, as deglobalization slowly but surely follows globalization. One of the candidates aspiring to replace Angela Merkel as the party chair after she refused to seek re-election said he doubted that the asylum right should continue to be a feature of the country's Basic Law.

The US president Donald Trump, known for his stern stance on immigration, issued an order end of November, authorizing military personnel on the US-Mexico border to use lethal force. Control of the US border in the south was also one of the pillars of Mr. Trump's 2016 election campaign.

Aided and abetted by Soros/CNN fake news invaders scale the wall, taunt U.S. Border Patrol agents at Tijuana, Mexico 

As migration dominates governmental agendas across the globe, there is still geopolitical fallout from closing borders, faced by leaders who are not afraid to slam the door firmly shut on new arrivals.

And even though migration numbers — compared to 2015-16 peak — are down, tens of thousands of people are still trying to reach Europe.

Invaders wait to be trasferred from the Topaz Responder ship run by Maltese NGO "Moas" and the Italian Red Cross to the Vos Hestia ship run by NGO "Save the Children" on November 4, 2016, a day after a rescue operation off the Libyan coast in the Mediterranean Sea (Photo: ANDREAS SOLARO)

In 2017, there were 728,470 applications for international protection in the EU and more than 538,000 people were granted protection by the EU. Spain has Spain has taken in 56,200 irregular migrants arriving by sea so far this year, Greece 28,700 and Italy 22,500.

In 2017, almost one in three migrant were from Syria while Afghanistan and Iraq rounded up the top three. Of the 175,800 Syrian citizens granted international protection in the EU, more than 70% received it in Germany.

Merkel, globalists have a date with the noose 

However, years of poorly managed immigration snowballed into a widespread resentment in the public and determination to seal the borders by political leaders.

This news bureau 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.

Monday, December 24, 2018

Indonesian Tsunami Crashes Through Sunda Strait: Hundreds Killed, Injured, Missing

Casualty counts continue to rise in early reporting  


The National Agency for Disaster Management (BNPB) and the Agency for Meteorology, Climatology, and Geophysics (BMKG) reported that high tide/tsunami hit Carita Beach in Banten Province, and hit the coast around the Sunda Strait, especially in Pandenglang, South Lampung and Serang districts.on 22 December 2018 at 21:27hrs.

Anak Krakatau
The event is recorded four times in four different locations with height of 30-90 cm and has 168 fatalities, 745 injured, 30 missing, 558 houses damaged, 9 unit hotel damaged, 60 damaged food stall, 350 boats damaged. The highest wave hit Serang sub-district at 21.27h local time with the height of 90 cm. BMKG issued high-tide warning before the tsunami struck for the mentioned area, however, this warning is not for tsunami early warning nor related to Mount Krakatoa activity.

The highway connecting Serang and Pandeglang was cut off due to the tsunami. 430 houses, nine hotels, 10 boats and dozens of vehicles reported damaged in three sub-districts, namely Padenglang, South Lampung and Serang.

Pandeglang is the worst affected area with 33 deaths, 491 injured, 400 houses and nine hotels damaged. There were reports about population movement after this disaster, but the actual situation is being assessed and numbers are being verified. Settlements and tourist sites on Tanjung Lesung Beach, Sumur Beach, Teluk Lada Beach, Panimbang Beach, and Carita Beach were severely affected. There were huge number of tourists in the coastal area of Pandeglang, one of the worst affected areas when the event struck.

In Lampung, 7 people died, 89 injured and 30 unit of houses heavily damaged and about 2,000 being displaced, while in Serang 3 people died, 4 injured and 2 missing. The assessment is still on going, the casualties might increase, based on government official report. The impact is likely to continue to grow considering that not all affected areas have been assessed.

Response by the provincial disaster management agency (BPBD):

BPBD together with the military, police, the national search and rescue agency (Basarnas), local government office, Ministry of Social Welfare Volunteers (Tagana), Indonesian Red Cross (PMI), volunteers and the community are providing emergency response support to the affected people.

Government has not yet declared emergency status or released response structure yet, currently it’s being locally coordinated along with the establishment of command post, field kitchen and displacement site. Heavy equipment is being dispatched to clear debris to ease evacuation and response.

Debris littered a property badly damaged by a tsunami in Carita, Indonesia, Sunday, Dec. 23. The tsunami occurred after the eruption of a volcano near Indonesia's Sunda Strait during a busy holiday weekend, sending water crashing ashore and sweeping away hotels, hundreds of houses and people attending a beach concert.(Fauzy Chaniago/AP)

The initial prediction on the cause could be that of a possible underwater landslide due to the eruption of Mount Anak Krakatau combined with higher than usual tides due to the full moon. The causes of this event are being investigated by BMKG (Agency for Meteorology, Climatology, and Geophysics), BNPB (Indonesian Disaster Management Authority) and PVMBG (Centre of Volcanology and Geological Disaster Mitigation). This Government has issued a warning of no activity along the coastal area.

The eruption of one of the world's most infamous volcanic islands is believed to have triggered the tsunami. The Anak Krakatau volcano lies in the Sunda Strait between Java and Sumatra islands, linking the Indian Ocean and Java Sea. It erupted about 24 minutes before the tsunami.

The waves smashed onto beaches at night without warning, ripping houses and hotels from their foundations in seconds and sweeping terrified concert-goers into the sea.

Gegar Prasetya, co-founder of the Tsunami Research Centre Indonesia, said Saturday's tsunami was likely caused by a flank collapse — when a big section of a volcano's slope gives way. He said it's possible for an eruption to trigger a landslide above ground or beneath the ocean, both capable of producing waves.

The number of dead could continue to rise because some areas had not yet been reached.

In September, more than 2,500 people were killed by an earthquake and tsunami that hit the city of Palu on the island of Sulawesi, east of Borneo.

This news bureau 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.

Wednesday, December 19, 2018

Weapons Of War On Our Streets: A Guide To The Militarization Of America's Police

A case for the 2d Amendment  


The claim often heard from those attempting to pass more gun control legislation is that all they’re trying to do is get the “weapons of war off our streets,” but it’s simply untrue that “weapons of war” are available to the general public. You would last about three minutes in a conventional war with an AR-15, even with one of the most aggressive builds you can get your hands on (that doesn’t mean it’s impossible for guerilla uprisings to defeat powerful enemies). The truth is that the only people with “weapons of war” on America’s streets are, increasingly, the police. 

Thanks primarily to the Pentagon's 1033 program which allows law enforcement agencies to get their hands on Department of Defense technology and the Bush-era War on Terror, American police have received a startling amount of heavy-duty, military-grade hardware. 

Between 1998 and 2014, the dollar value of military hardware sent to police departments skyrocketed from $9.4 million to $796.8 million. 

And just as when "all you've got is a hammer, then everything looks like a nail", militarized police have become more willing to use their new weapons when carrying out law enforcement tasks. For example, the number of SWAT raids in the United States grew dramatically from about 3,000 in 1980, to a whopping 50,000 SWAT raids in 2014, according to The New Jim Crow by Michelle Alexander. 

To say that the militarization of the police is nothing new is to ignore America’s recent history as well as the long-standing model of a peace officer. As the police have militarized and the Pentagon backs major players in Hollywood, the focus has shifted from one who keeps the peace to one who enforces the law - and that's an important difference.

What Is the Difference Between a Law Enforcement Officer and a Peace Officer?

The model for police, and the constables and sheriffs before them prior to the late 20th Century, was that of a peace officer. In many states, it’s not even true that police are law enforcement officers – even though it’s a term frequently used by the police and their fans in the “Blue Lives Matter,” “Thin Blue Line,” and “Back the Blue” movements. 

It’s a subtle, but important, distinction: Is the role of the police to enforce the law or to keep the peace? Consider the differencebetween the police force of a typical American city and the fictional Andy Taylor of The Andy Griffith Show. The former is concerned primarily with enforcing the law for its own sake and catching as many “lawbreakers” as possible. The latter, on the other hand, is primarily concerned with keeping the peace. Sometimes that means looking the other way when laws get broken. 

This isn’t simply a matter of how pleasant or unpleasant it is to deal with the police. Law enforcement officers might be writing parking tickets in the middle of a burglary epidemic due to their need to enforce all the laws all the time. Conversely, a peace officer is going to ignore a lot of low-level, habitual crime – even when there are clear victims (for example, vandalism or loitering) – because he emphasizes going out and catching violent and dangerous criminals. There’s no impulse to arrest a guy who habitually smokes weed on a street corner if he’s providing the police with valuable information leading to the arrest of violent criminals. 

Peace officers might have the need for a sidearm and a shotgun, but they have little or no need for, say, a tank, to say nothing of the variety of nasty DARPA weapons police departments are increasingly wanting and getting.

The Origins of Militarized Police

Before we begin talking about the militarized American police, it’s worth mentioning that United States law specifically prohibits the military from enforcing the laws in the U.S. That’s why we don’t have the Army enforcing the law, and also why we don’t have a military-style gendarmerie as is common in Europe. This law, the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, was passed after the removal of federal troops from the Southern states following the end of Reconstruction. With rare exception, the federal government is not allowed to use the Army or the Air Force to enforce the law and the Navy has strict regulations for both the Navy and Marine Corps regarding the use of either for domestic law enforcement. 

However, this law has been somewhat undermined due to police forces becoming so much like the military, which began during Prohibition in the 1920s. Organized crime got its first foothold in American life thanks to the lucrative black market in liquor. This was also the golden age of bank robbery with figures like Bonnie and Clyde, Pretty Boy Floyd and John Dillinger becoming folk heroes. The Thompson submachine gun and the Browning Automatic Rifle were increasingly used by organized crime and the “stars” of bank robbery. 

The Prohibition Era saw domestic police departments wielding automatic weapons for the first time. There was nothing nefarious about this from the perspective of local police departments. In fact, it was the police departments most regularly in contact with vicious organized crime, such as Chicago and Kansas City, who led the way in arming their officers with automatic weapons and armored vehicles. At least two rounds of ammunition, the .38 Super and the .357 Magnum, were developed with the express purpose of being able to penetrate the early bulletproof vests worn by gangsters in the Prohibition Era. 

Overall crime increased by 24 percent during the first two years of Prohibition. This included a nine-percent increase in theft and burglary, a 13-percent increase in homicides, and a 13-percent increase in assault and battery. Overall, police department costs increased by 11.4 percent. However, because the police were busy fighting the scourge of demon alcohol, it was difficult for them to target crimes unrelated to this. In fact, a study of South Carolina counties that enforced Prohibition versus those who didn’t found a whopping 30- to 60-percent increase in homicides in the counties who enforced the law. All of this is according to Charles Hanson Towne in The Rise and Fall of Prohibition: The Human Side of What the Eighteenth Amendment Has Done to the United States

This era of militarization drew to a close with the end of Prohibition itself. However, the militarization of police would resume again a few decades down the line.

The Second Wave of Militarized Police

The second wave of police militarization begins with the race riots in the 1950s and 1960s, with the Watts Riots in 1965 gaining a sort of gravitas. The LAPD used military-style weapons and tactics to end the riots. What’s more, an increasingly militant civil rights movement was seen by the CIA as an arm of international Communism. While there is some merit to this view, it’s certainly true that it led to a philosophy of increasingly militarized police. 

The militarization of police is not by any means based on manufactured and artificial paranoia. Even in the case of Prohibition, it’s a simple fact that organized crime used weapons with firepower far in excess of what the police had access to. Similarly, the second wave of militarized police was partly in response to an increasingly militarized organized crime thanks in part to the beginnings of the War on Drugs. 

On one hand, the police were encountering more and more dangerous organized crime syndicates, such as the Medellin Cartel and street gangs like the Gangster Disciples. Urban unrest included not just race riots like the aforementioned Watts Riots and the 1967 riots in Detroit, but also the riot outside of the 1968 Democratic Party Convention. Domestic terrorist organizations like the Weather Underground, the Symbionese Liberation Army, and the Earth Liberation Front likewise offered increased challenges to law enforcement. 

Unrelated to the War on Drugs, the 1986 FBI Miami shootout was a game-changer for law enforcement budgets. Police outnumbered suspects by a factor of four. Despite this, they were pinned down by suppressive gunfire. The incident lasted five minutes and 145 rounds were fired. The suspects were hit multiple times, but continued to fight in part because the officers’ and agents’ service revolvers did not have sufficient stopping power. In response, there was a movement to increase the firepower of service revolvers. This is when semi-automatic pistols began to replace the revolver and larger magazines became the rule. Rifles, shotguns, and heavier body armor also saw increased adoption after this shootout. 

Another incident accelerating the militarization of police is the North Hollywood shootout of 1997. This bank robbery left two dead (the perps) and 20 wounded – 12 police officers and eight civilians. It lasted 44 minutes, an eternity in terms of police shootouts, with approximately 2,000 rounds fired. The perps got off approximately twice as many rounds as the police officers on the scene, but the game-changer was the arrival of the SWAT team, who had much more appropriate weaponry. This led to everyday police officers getting equipment that was customary for SWAT teams in the 1990s.

The 1033 Program

The 1033 Program was enacted in the wake of the 1997 North Hollywood shootout. Created by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997, it allowed law enforcement agencies to get their hands on military hardware. Unsurprisingly, the preference was given to law enforcement engaged in anti-drug and counter-terror activity, underscoring the vital role of wars on abstract concepts in increasing the militarization of the police force. Bill Clinton – he of the massacres at Waco and Ruby Ridge – signed the bill into law. 

$5.1 billion in material was transferred from the Department of Defense to local law enforcement between 1997 and 2014, with ammunition being the most common requisition. 8,000 law enforcement offices participate as of 2014. 

Also included in this total are 20 different school law enforcement agencies. The Los Angeles School Police Department has requisitioned 61 assault rifles and three grenade launchers. Ten school police departments in the State of Texas and have requisitioned 25 automatic pistols, 64 M16s, 18 M14s, and tactical vests. 

The program has come under bipartisan criticism lead by Rand Paul. Senator Paul stated that the program has “incentivized the militarization of local police precincts and helped municipal governments build what are essentially small armies.” Senator Claire McCaskill led the first investigation of the program starting in September 2014. At least one study found a correlation between the 1033 program and increased fatalities at the hands of law enforcement.

21st-Century Police Militarization

One of the big game-changers for militarization of police was the 9/11 attacks. This greatly eroded the Fourth Amendment protections against unlawful search and seizure. Now police – local, state and federal – need to suspect “terrorism.” This provides the same convenient cover for police overreach that was previously offered by the War on Drugs. 

Obama gave new directives for the 1033 program that forbade police from acquiring certain weapons from the military. These include weaponized vehicles, grenade launchers and bayonets. Attorney General Jeff Sessions ended these restrictions upon assuming office in 2017. 

The propaganda war for militarization often comes under the rubric of a “war on police.” However, there is no factual basis for the idea that police officers are under some kind of unprecedented siege. The year 2015 had one of the lowest levels of police murderson record. Not only were fewer police officers being killed on the job, far fewer people were attempting to hurt police officers. 

The weapons that come to local police departments through the 1033 pipeline are direct from the military and, by extension, the War on Terror. 

Training with military units is also increasingly common according to a report from the Cato Institute. The training generally takes place not with regular infantry units, but with specialised and elite groupings within the United States military who are more familiar with guerilla uprisings – such as the Navy SEALs and the Army Rangers.

The Role of Civil Asset Forfeiture

Civil asset forfeiture (CAF) is a major driver in the militarization of the police force. Put simply, CAF is a legal principle that allows police to seize money and property from “suspected” criminals, which they can do without a warrant because the suspect’s property doesn’t have the presumption of innocence. Note that police do not have to convict or even indict. Indeed, indictments are not even filed in over 80 percent of all cases. Police can simply seize property, more or less at will, with some property harder to seize than others. Seizure of anything under $20,000 will almost certainly stand because that’s about what it’s going to cost you to fight CAF in court. 

Most of the money raised through civil asset forfeiture is filed under “other.” This can be anything from a $600 coffee maker to a tank. Because the burden of proof is so low and the benefits are so high, CAF is effectively a legally allowed form of theft by police officers, allowing them to purchase military-grade hardware with stolen property. Here is a short list of military hardware purchased with civil asset forfeiture funds
  • $5 million helicopter for the Los Angeles Police Department
  • $1 million mobile command bus for Prince George County, Maryland
  • $227,000 for a tank in Douglasville, GA, a town with a population of 32,000
  • $54,000 for 27 M-4 assault rifles in Braselton, GA, a town with a population of 9,476
While not the sole, nor even the primary, means by which the police are becoming militarized, this is a significant method for police departments to bankroll their own militarization.

Highlights of Police Militarization

It’s one thing to discuss police militarization simply in terms of weapons acquisition. It’s another to discuss police militarization in terms of actual incidents. Two high-profile incidents involving heavily militarized police are worth examining. 
  • Ruby Ridge: This is notorious within in the Second Amendment and liberty movements, so it hardly needs to be repeated. In 1992, the United States Marshal Service attempted to serve a bench warrant at Ruby Ridge, the home of Randy Weaver and his family. His wife Vicki and his 14-year-old son Sammy were shot by USMS and FBI agents armed with M16s, sniper rifles and weaponized vehicles. Randy Weaver’s attorney made accusations of criminal wrongdoing and a resulting 14-day Senate investigation called for sweeping law enforcement reforms to avoid another similar incident. Federal officers also killed the Weaver family dog. 
  • Branch Davidians: This is perhaps one of, if not the, archetypal example of a militarized police force greatly overreaching. Armed with .50 caliber rifles, M728 Combat Engineer Vehicles (which are effectively tanks) and M79 grenade launchers, the FBI and ATF engaged in a firefight with Branch Davidians inside. Controversy remains to this day with regard to who fired first and who started the fire that consumed the building, leaving 82 members of the church dead.
These are the big three, but there are many smaller events also worth mentioning. During the wreckage of Hurricane Katrina, private Blackwater contractors patrolled the streets with automatic weapons. They were accused of summary execution of looters. In a low point for militarized police in 2014, a SWAT team in Cornelia, Georgia severely mutilated the face of an 18-month-old baby boy with a flash bang grenade in a fruitless search for drugs.

The Role of SWAT Teams

SWAT teams are effectively the military of the police force. Begun in 1965 in Philadelphia, SWAT teams were conceived as a way to restrain urban unrest, deal with hostage situations or handle barricaded marksmen like Charles Whitman. 

Indeed, early uses of SWAT seemed to be well within the range of appropriateness. In December 1969, the LAPD’s SWAT team squared off with the Black Panthers, with Daryl Gates requesting and receiving permission to use a grenade launcher. In May 1974, the same SWAT team had a several-hours-long gun battle with the Symbionese Liberation Army. 

However, SWAT teams gradually began to tackle missions that were not, strictly speaking, appropriate for the tools in their toolbox. What’s more, once LAPD’s SWAT team became famous, every city seemed to want one. The number of SWAT teams in cities of 50,000 or more doubled between the mid-80s and late-90s, at which point 89 percent of all cities of this size had a SWAT team. 

Some startling facts when it comes to SWAT teams: 
  • 62% of all SWAT deployments were for drug raids
  • 79% of these were done on private residences
  • Only 7% of all raids were done for situations SWAT was invented for – namely barricades or hostage situations
Even smaller cities have SWAT teams now, which raises the question of why. Mission creep is the short answer, with SWAT teams now being used for operations far beyond the original scope of their work. Put simply, the SWAT team was not created to serve every search warrant that comes across the desk of a small-town police force. 

SWAT teams ostensibly exist to respond to “high risk” scenarios. But there are seemingly no guidelines for what makes a situation high risk. Sometimes local SWAT teams use a threat matrix. However, these matrices are highly subjective and vulnerable to abuse. Partial responses are discouraged. Either the SWAT team is not deployed at all or there is a full-throttle response. 

To use one example of why these matrices don’t work, let us consider the presence or absence of weapons. There is no way of knowing whether or not weapons will be present. So officers must subjectively guess whether or not they believe weapons will be present. Unfortunately, officers are pretty bad at this guessing game. According to an ACLU report, SWAT officers believed weapons were present in 35 percent of cases, but only actually found them in a scant 13 percent. In 36 percent of cases where SWAT was deployed to find drugs, no drugs were found.

Fusion Centers: Surveillance and Snooping

As the military’s tools for surveillance become more powerful, this too will trickle down to the local police. 

In at least one case, it already has. Fusion Centers are hubs for local, state and federal police to share information. They’re effectively intelligence-gathering done by various police agencies who pool their resources. While this isn’t an uncommon practice, the Fusion Centers have virtually no oversight and are filled with zeal for the War on Terror. While its primary existence was to surveil in the fight against terrorism, Fusion Centers have quickly ballooned to gather intelligence on just about anything – and it’s not just the police. The military participates in Fusion Centers, as does the private sector, which means they’re a privacy nightmare. 

The federal government has pushed Fusion Centers and largely bankrolled them. Hundreds of FBI agents work with Fusion Centers, with the federal government providing hundreds of millions of dollars in federal aid. In the case of the Maryland Coordination and Analysis Center, the federal government created a Fusion Center at the state level, only eventually turning control of an ostensibly state agency to the state. 30 percent of these “state” agencies are physically located in federal office space. 

Private sector companies collect, store and analyze data for Fusion Centers. This would be dangerous on its own, but the lack of any oversight makes it particularly troublesome. Even if a private sector has the best of intentions, malicious third-party actors could access some of your most sensitive data if it’s been datamined by a Fusion Center. A company without the best intentions can do all kinds of “government-approved” snooping into your personal affairs. 

Another nasty surveillance tool currently being deployed by the police is the Stingray phone tracker. This is effectively a phony cell phone tower that snoops on cell phone calls, which can extract significant information about you from your cell phone. Originally to be used only in terrorism investigations, the Electronic Frontier Foundation notes that the LAPD “has been using it for just about any investigation imaginable." They can also be used to jam or otherwise interfere with your phone signal. Stingrays are highly mobile and can be mounted to just about any vehicle. 

All of this is part of an overall drive for increased police surveillance starting at the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security and trickling down. “Total Information Awareness” was one of the more Orwellian euphemisms of the early Bush and Department of Homeland Security years. It was quickly renamed Terrorism Information Awareness, then codenamed “Basketball.” Its goal is to know everything, or at least as much as it can. In 2012, the New York Times reported that this program was “quietly thriving” at the National Security Agency. 

The Information Awareness Office, established by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA – who we will discuss more later), oversaw Total Information Awareness. They collect emails, social network identities, records for phone calls and credit card purchases, medical records and a host of other information with no need for a warrant. Congress defunded this program, but it exists under the auspices of a number of different agencies according to Edward Snowden

Technologies developed by the Information Awareness Office (and in the wake of Snowden’s revelations, it’s worth noting that these are just the technologies that have been made public) includes: 
  • Genisys: A massive database for storing the large amount of data needed to fuel Total Information Awareness. 
How much of this has trickled down to your local police department is largely unknown. 

The Detriments of a Militarized Police Force

There are a number of negative consequences arising from the existence of a militarized police force. 
Civil Liberties: Chief among the problems presented by a militarized police force are civil liberties. Militarized police seems to violate the spirit, if not the letter, of the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which forbids using the military to enforce domestic law in most cases and under ordinary circumstances.
  • Surveillance: The militarized police force also uses military-style forms of surveillance. A January 2017 report from the Cato Institute accused militarized police of “mission creep,” going beyond simple weapons and tactics and into surveillance.
  • Alienation: Militarized police are the antithesis of community policing, which leverages good community relations and the resources flowing from those relations to prevent and solve crimes. Military-style training for police, battle dress uniforms and even just the color black might provoke more aggression from officers. Named missions such as “War on Drugs” likewise make community policing more difficult. 
  • Killing Dogs: There’s significant evidence suggesting that the more militarized a police force is, the more likely it is to shoot a dog. Yes, really. The Puppycide Database Project tracks these things. 
Lack of Oversight: At the local, state and federal levels, there is little-to-no oversight when it comes to the militarization of the police. Most states do not keep tabs on the statistics of their SWAT teams. Where they do, reports are frequently incomplete and little-to-no action is taken on their basis. No federal agency collects information about local SWAT teams. There is little oversight of 1033 or SWAT teams either by the Department of Justice or the Department of Homeland Security.

All of this is perhaps why, under the Obama Justice Department, there was a push toward demilitarization of the police force. In 2015, the Task Force for 21st Century Policing recommended restriction of military hardware such as grenade launchers and armored vehicles. President Donald Trump has since reversed this, reinstating the entire 1033 program and remilitarizing police.

DARPA: Police Militarization of the Future

Since there is a clearly established pipeline running from the Pentagon’s latest and greatest toys, it’s not much of a stretch to say that the weapons being developed by the Pentagon today are going to be used on the streets of America in the very near future. 

In fact, there’s an entire department of the Pentagon dedicated to developing futuristic weapons to help the United States win the new arms. It’s called the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, commonly known as DARPA. This agency has not only developed weapons, but also a number of contemporary technologies most people take for granted – such as GPS, graphic user interface, the mouse, and even the internet itself. Recent research includes more intuitive prosthetic limbs as well as brain implants that will help those with memory loss regain their memory. 

But DARPA isn’t just working on projects like these with the promise to revolutionize medicine and increase the quality of human life. They also work on some rather nasty little projects that will almost certainly trickle down to your local police department through the 1033 program. Some of the futuristic weapons currently in development by DARPA include: 
  • Active Denial System: The active denial system is an invisible ray gun heating the skin of people in a given area to 130 degrees. The targets instinctively flee, something that DARPA calls the “goodbye effect.” The end result can leave second- or third-degree burns on up to 20 percent of the body’s surface. The weapon has already been tested in Afghanistan
  • Taser X12: Nearly everyone is familiar with the Taser. The Taser X12 is effectively that in 12-gauge shotgun form. This extends the reach of a Taser weapon from about 20 feet to about 100 feet. 
  • Skull Piercing Microwaves: Yep, you read that right. One of the projects DARPA is working on right now leverages the audio effect of microwaves. This creates shockwaves inside the skull, which are read by the brain as sound. This can result in discomfort, incapacitation and brain damage. 
  • Long-Range Acoustic Device: Sirens might not sound like a big deal, but the current ones being worked on by DARPA are so loud they can cause permanent hearing damage very quickly. Pittsburgh police already used this against protestors in 2009. More advanced sonic weapons can be deadly, including the Thunder Generator developed by the Israelis.
  • Voice of God: This one sounds impossible, but it’s not. The Voice of God is pretty much exactly what it sounds like. It’s a weapon beaming words directly into your head so that you think God is talking to you. This leverages the same technology in LRADs, but for different effect.
These are just a few of the weapons that we know about. There is almost certainly far more frightening classified weapons coming down the pike over the next decade. 

The tendency is strongly in the direction of increasingly militarized police. This renders the notion of “weapons of war on our streets” as a gun grabber argument exceptionally weak. The most heavily armed gang on the street isn’t your local street gang – it’s law enforcement. They have weapons far in excess to that of the average citizen or even the average criminal. This means resisting them can easily be deadly, even when you’re within your legal rights. 

This raises a point worthy of consideration: The usual suspects will cry and rage at your ability to legally own an AR-15, a right codified by the United States Constitution. Rare is the gun grabber who makes any kind of stink when police use directed energy weapons. Remember that gun grabbers aren’t against guns – they’re just against yours.

Sunday, December 16, 2018

Poppy Bush's Seed And Bitter Harvest: Half Truths / History (Part 4)

The Bush crime family dating back to WW1    

By Andrew Kreig

This concludes a four-part Justice Integrity Project series on life and legacy of the President George H.W. Bush, who died on Nov. 30. Bush is shown below right in an official photo from his term as president from 1989 to 1993.

The material in this Part 4 covers his presidential decision-making involving the Iraq War, his overall domestic program of deregulation and an overall historical assessment. 

The material is excerpted from this editor's book Presidential Puppetry: Obama, Romney and Their Masters (2015 updated edition).

The material in Part 4, highlighted below in red, is taken from the chapter 'George H.W. Bush: Poppy's Seed and Bitter Harvest' (Part 2). 'Poppy'' was the late president's nickname among his family.

  • Introduction and News Clippings (Part 1)
  • Poppy's Progress (Part 2)
  • Texas Politics, Bush-Style 
  • Deep In the Heart of Washington Intrigue
  • Refuelling In Houston
  • White House Years and Fears
  • Iran-Contra
  • Deregulation
  • Iraq War
  • The Rest of the Story
Presidential Puppetry charted recent presidents' secret ties to the nation's elite private sector power structure (including major media organizations), which sometimes work collaboratively with the CIA and FBI operational arms.

These professional ties helped enable the chosen political aspirants to establish support for their careers in ways that most of their political competitors and the public would never know, thus undermining the voting process (and implicating the corporate-owned media in a failure to inform).

The book included three chapters about the Bush family. The one about the late president, the focus of this series, was "George H.W. Bush: Poppy's Seed and Bitter Harvest." Preceding that chapter in Presidential Puppetry is a chapter about Poppy's father, "Prescott Bush: Roots of the Bushes."

Following that in the book is a chapter about the more recent Bush president, "George W. Bush: Shameless, Heartless and Selected — Not Elected."

From the Chapter: 'George H.W. Bush: Poppy's Seed and Bitter Harvest' 


Chief Justice William Rehnquist, a Republican appointee, swears in President George H. W. Bush in 1989 as the incoming president's wife, Barbara, looks on

The central domestic purpose of the Reagan-Bush administration was to implement free market, free trade, and other deregulatory theories that supposedly hobbled the U.S. economy at the time. As with Iran-Contra’s radical cuts in constitutional checks and balances, Poppy Bush was at the center of the deregulatory changes that helped reposition the nation’s economic structure to align better with the perceived golden age of fewer government restrictions, as in the Roaring Twenties.

By the end of the Roaring Eighties, the Reagan-Bush changes would transform much of the economy. This led to many new fortunes, especially among well-connected cronies, along with false hopes and complacency among many others too busy living their lives to notice long-term trends. Yet even insiders had difficulties foreseeing the financial future.

The president’s third-born son, Neil Bush, below, became both a villain and a victim in the $2 billion Silverado Savings and Loan scandal. That bank’s loss was a small part of the deregulatory debacle that cost taxpayers tens of billions of dollars in bailout funds. Also ruined by bad investments was Democrat-turned-Republican John Connally, the former Nixon Treasury Secretary and Bush rival regarded as the most astute politician of his generation next to LBJ. When the bubble burst, a national recession and Ross Perot-led rebellion against free trade helped scuttle Poppy’s 1992 reelection bid.

Neil Bush

The GOP victory in 1980 against Jimmy Carter (below right) launched a wave of what appeared to be exciting new financial investments, including the leveraged buyout (LBO) that enabled corporate “raiders” to use a company’s own assets to acquire it and transform it, supposedly, into a more efficient model based on best practices. 

Three of the best-known LBOs had longtime links to the Bush family and Texas oil fields. The national leader in this was Henry Kravis of KKR (Kohlberg, Kravis, Roberts), son of Ray Kravis, the Tulsa and Wall Street oil development genius who had offered Poppy his first job out of Yale. Another was Hugh Liedtke, a co-founder of Zapata who would go on to evolve it into Pennzoil Petroleum and win billions of dollars in remarkable litigation against Texaco, which led to the latter’s dissolution. Another was T. Boone Pickens, who built his Mesa Petroleum raiding company with Liedtke’s help.

I observed with alarm related developments in the sphere I best knew, the news business, and so published a case study in 1987 called Spiked: How Chain Management Corrupted America’s Oldest Newspaper. After the book, however, I finished my legal education at the University of Chicago and began working in the Washington office of Latham and Watkins. Its clients had included Michael Milken of Drexel Burnham Lambert, the national leader in using junk bonds for acquisitions. One of the senior partners was Mark Fowler, who radically deregulated the communications industry as Reagan’s first and only Federal Communications Commission chairman from 1981 to 1989. That fostered vast new opportunities for many in that sector, which I joined for two decades, extending to the date of this writing to some degree.

“There are a million stories in The Naked City,” an announcer used to intone on a long-ago television show by that name. So it’s pointless to provide more than a sample of them. My best effort at a conclusion is that the great financial experiments of the Reagan-Bush era helped many people in the 1980s, including myself. But the policies were too extreme even then. Now they are spinning out of control as the rich get richer and others are left to fend for themselves, without adequate redress.

We have seen that devastation can come very fast. Every American needs to consider thoughtfully the thesis of Naomi Klein’s The Shock Doctrine, which argues that savvy politicians and industry leaders nefariously implement policies to profiteer from natural disasters, wars, and economic upheavals. Disturbing as her theme might be, it is congruent with examples elsewhere, including in the remainder of this book.

Iraq War

During the Persian Gulf War two decades ago, President George H. W. Bush and his team demonstrated their contempt for public disclosure or other democratic procedures that might hinder their freewheeling approach to oil-based foreign policy. That policy, a disaster for the United States overall, has been highly lucrative for the Bush family, its cronies, and its constituencies.

George H.W. Bush set the stage for generational wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, resulting in the murders and maiming of thousands of U.S. military personnel while reaping millions in personal profits

The war began with Iraq’s invasion of its smaller neighbor Kuwait on August 2, 1990. A U.S.-led coalition of thirty-four nations retaliated in Operation Desert Storm. Aerial bombardments of Iraqi forces began January 17, 1991. A ground assault on February 23 quickly liberated Kuwait, and pulverized Iraq into surrender three days later.

The victory temporarily sent President Bush’s popularity ratings sky high. That is like measuring victory for a baseball game by one inning’s play, however. Bush and his team used phony public relations tactics to con the American public into supporting a war against Iraq, a former ally. Overall, the Reagan-Bush years paved the way for vast death and destruction. Despite all of the lives and treasure the United States has spent in Iraq to foster pro-West support, that nation is now Iran’s most important ally.

The Bush/Cheney cabal is responsible for each and every U.S. casualty in their bogus Middle East wars for oil

Keys to the Iraq disaster are the long-term business ties of the Bush-led, Texas-centered oil, banking, and arms sectors with oil-rich, Persian Gulf royalty. Most important of all are the business and government ties that the Bush family has nurtured with Saudi Arabia. 

The United States helps protect a near-feudal monarchy through arms sales and other means in return for the profits from the arms sales, reasonable policies on oil sales, and other foreign policy partnerships. The United States-Saudi bilateral relationship is buttressed with similar understandings with other oil-rich royal rulers in the Persian Gulf states.

George Bush genuflecting before Saudi apostates

Several decades of private relationships exist between those royals and their United States counterpart, the Bush dynasty. In the 2004 book House of Bush, House of Saud, author Craig Unger documented $1.48 billion in payments by the Saudi royal family to four Bush officials and their affiliated entities. That is a tiny portion of the sums accruing to leaders of the military-industrial complex from Middle East wars of recent decades. The four officials were the two Bush presidents, the family’s longtime advisor Baker, and Dick Cheney. 

The entities included the Carlyle Group, a financier of weapons companies that boasts Bush and several of his former top aides as executives, and Halliburton, which Cheney formerly ran as CEO in the 1990s. 

As previously noted, Poppy Bush cultivated Saudi relationships when he became a Houston-based banker and dealmaker in the 1970s following his CIA leadership and before his presidential run. Baker has alternated between government and private-sector deal making at the highest levels for decades. For the past decade, he has demonstrated his priorities, if not loyalties, by defending Saudi officials from a trillion-dollar damage suit filed in New York’s federal court by families of 9/11 victims.

This is part of a long pattern, as we can recall from the beginning of this chapter. Harriman family brothers Averell and Bunny worked with public relations impresario Bert Walker to encourage the United States to enter World War I, with Poppy’s great-grandfather, Samuel Bush, presiding over the federal government’s purchases of arms and ammunition from, not surprisingly, well-connected companies. 

Then Prescott Bush and his company, Harriman Brothers, made a fortune by serving as the main United States agent for Adolf Hitler’s leading financier in the run-up to World War II. Warmongering and war profiteering have thus been the Bush family business for nearly a century.

Prescott Bush’s partners in the secret web of Fritz Thyssen-Nazi controlled ventures included former New York Governor W. Averell Harriman and his younger brother, E. Roland Harriman. Their quarter-century of Nazi financial transactions, from 1924-1951, were conducted by the New York private banking firm, Brown Brothers Harriman. Records show that Bush and his colleagues routinely attempted to conceal their activities from government investigators

During the 1980s, the Reagan-Bush administration generally supported Iraq’s ruler Saddam Hussein in his horrific war with Iran that killed more than a million, counting deaths on both sides. United States officials knew of his brutal methods and dangerous goals, but regarded his nonreligious regime as a useful regional counterweight to the hardline Shia Muslims running the much-larger Iran. 

Donald Rumsfeld greets Saddam Hussein
In July 1990, Hussein informed the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie, that he planned military action against neighboring Kuwait for what he claimed as debts by the small, oil-rich, Sunni Moslem emirate. Iraq invaded on August 2, 1990. Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney and Secretary of State James Baker helped lead a Bush administration response opposing the invasion.

Cheney’s memoir In My Time described the reason as protecting the balance of power in the Middle East, including potential threats to Saudi Arabia and Israel if Iraq became too powerful. But the Bush administration also wanted a big American victory to make the country feel good about the president, the country, and war in general following the “Vietnam Syndrome” of withdrawal from foreign engagements, according to Robert Parry, the intrepid former Associated Press and Newsweek reporter who had broken the Iran-Contra story.

A U.S. Marine patrol walked across the charred landscape near a burning oil well during perimeter patrol near Kuwait City at the end of the Persian Gulf War

How do we know such ambitions were pivotal? Because Iraq’s dictator extended unsuccessful offers to negotiate or withdraw from Kuwait, he wrote. The Bush administration kept the peace offers secret in the same way Washington’s “conventional wisdom” conveniently shifted to make a villain of Hussein and heroes of the oligarchical Kuwaitis.

The administration did not want to rely publicly on those points. The male-run religious Gulf States were not especially sympathetic as victims to the American public. Instead, a phoney Washington public relations strategy evolved. 

Kuwait, acting through front groups, hired a score of U.S. public relations agencies to build grassroots support for a U.S.-led military rescue mission also sought by Bush. Kuwait spent $10 million on Hill and Knowlton, alone, to bring the U.S. into the war. One of the agency’s most effective stunts was to create dramatic testimony to Congress by an unidentified teenager describing how Iraq troops were killing babies in Kuwait by pulling them out of incubators. David Gergen, a highly influential political commentator and former White House staffer, is typical of those who spread that story widely by decrying the invader’s responsibility for twenty-two babies killed when they were pulled from hospital incubators.

David Gergen: Journalistic fraud, serial liar, and current CNN fake news hack has shilled and covered for successive U.S. Presidents since the Nixon administration

Babies were not killed. It was a hoked-up story by Gergen and others who remain prominent because of their willingness to deceive, not despite that trait. Harper’s publisher John R. MacArthur, among others, documented the scam in his 1992 book, Second Front. It turned out that the heart-rending testimony before Congress had been by the daughter of Kuwait’s ambassador. Postwar research found no evidence that Iraqi troops had endangered newborn babies in incubators. These psychological operations are finely honed. Experts in perception management, propaganda, and mind control believe that horror stories about rape and baby-killing, even if fraudulent, are especially effective in generating support for war, especially among women.

The baby-killing story was only a small part of a massive propaganda campaign to stampede the American public into war. This job was outsourced to the private sector to prevent accountability to Congress and the media. It was just like many sensitive foreign policy missions since the CIA used Kermit Roosevelt to overthrow Iran’s elected prime minister in 1953. 

Iranian Premier Dr. Mohammad Mossadeq – Kermit Roosevelt, Jr. – and Kermit undercover in Tehran

The main operatives were Washington’s booming lobbying and public relations sector hired by the government of Kuwait through various front-group names to disguise government involvement. As documented by MacArthur and Susan Trento in her 1992 book, The Power House, the main player was Hill and Knowlton, Washington’s highest-grossing lobbying and public relations firm. Its president was Craig Fuller, former chief of staff to Vice President Bush.

Even more important than Fuller as the hands-on Hill and Knowlton chairman was Robert Keith Gray, below, an advisor to five GOP presidents extending from Eisenhower to Bush. Prior to taking on Kuwait as a client, Gray’s extensive CIA ties helped him recruit the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI) as a client. 

Robert Keith Gray, White House official and lobbyist, 1921-2014

That was when the CIA-friendly bank needed serious image polishing after it was exposed as undertaking massive illegal money laundering to assist narcotics trafficking by some of the world’s most notorious dictators. Hill and Knowlton helped out, just as it would for Kuwait. I came to know Gray during the summer of 2012 by inviting him on my weekly public affairs radio show to discuss his new book, an attack on Obama. Gray seemed like a happy warrior, delighted as he approached his 90th birthday to be still in the political attack mode, even though he had much to hide in terms of professional and personal secrets.

The experience underscored several axioms of public life in Washington. First, the enormous clout of the revolving door between government and business. Second, how much ostensibly independent major media are influenced by well-funded lobbyist/government relations companies, such as Hill and Knowlton. Finally, even those who are the masters of media manipulation, like Gray, can become genuinely frustrated at other’s tactics ─ and even at “the media.”

Most importantly, the tale of sub-rosa Bush efforts to engage the United States in a Middle Eastern war brings this chapter full circle to its beginning. We saw how Harriman-Walker initiatives helped to foster United States entry into World War I. This helped set the stage for arms deals and the postwar financing of Hitler that would help keep the clan (by then including the Bushes) and their cronies in wealth during repetitions of the cycle to current times.

Left to right are mother Barbara Pierce Bush, son George Walker Bush, father George Herbert
Walker Bush, grandmother Dorothy Walker Bush and grandfather Prescott Sheldon Bush

The Rest of the Story

Among the many strands to George H.W. Bush’s career, one of the most important is his role in expanding American war culture and arms-dealing into the Middle East. A mainstream biographer wrote of Bush:

[No] major American leader remotely matched his 1976-92 record of pouring weaponry into Afghanistan, co-opting Pakistani intelligence, liaising with the shah’s Iranian police, making secret arms deals with Shiite ayatollahs, becoming near family to Saudi princes, rescuing undemocratic Kuwait, and helping to transform Peshawar – Kipling’s mountain gateway to the Khyber Pass – into a CIA station and munitions dump.

Curiously, Bush and his allies find themselves repeatedly boasting of “A New World Order,” even though the phrase had already been associated with foreign policy disasters extending back to Woodrow Wilson and the League of Nations. Bush used it for the major foreign policy address of his administration to a joint session of Congress in late 1990 after the collapse of the Soviet Union and shortly before the invasion of Iraq. Although “New World Order” carries a certain bold resonance even to the unsophisticated, it could hardly have escaped Bush’s speech-writers that the phrase is regarded as powerful code-language in certain circles. Skull and Bones has been more commonly known for more than a century as “The Order” to its secret initiates, who include not just the Bushes but many influential public affairs pundits.

Christian Broadcasting Network founder Pat Robertson published The New World Order, a best-seller in the election year of 1992. Those with only passing familiarity with the conservative televangelist might imagine he would seek to support Bush, whom Robertson identified as “a man of integrity.” Instead, Robertson — a Yale Law School graduate, son of a U.S. Senator, and the founder of Regent University — decried the danger that “one-world” secret societies run by elites posed for the United States. Robertson’s main fear was the destruction of religious faith and national sovereignty. He traced dupes and danger from the Colonial era through the Wilson presidency, the aberration of Hitler, and through the Bush era, citing presidents ostensibly as different as the Republican Nixon and Democrat Carter.

Robertson’s blunt conclusion was that each was beholden to behind-the-scenes players such as the Rockefellers, the Ford Foundation, and what he called “the mind-boggling” role of the Council on Foreign Relations. Robertson also warned against spiritual deterioration in Americans from the great Bush triumph of victory in the Gulf War, when, “for the first time since Babel all the nations of the earth acted in concert with one another.”

Those warnings were three decades ago. I’ll not seek to repeat all his fears and predictions. I merely note that even Republicans have had concerns about their party’s most successful family dynasty.

In 2004, author Craig Unger estimated that the House of Saud sent at least $1.477 billion “to the Bush family and its friends and allies over the years.”

Even the powerful cannot always control events. In 1992, Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton made George Bush a one-term president, ending a dozen Bush years in the White House. Clinton, born fatherless and poor, was groomed at elite institutions via a Rhodes scholarship, Oxford, CIA work, and Yale. His ascension was thus not so much a defeat for the old order, but a vindication of the economic elite’s wisdom in fostering alternative avenues to ensure its own success no matter who prevails in elections.

Andrew Kreig

Andrew Kreig, Esq.
Andrew Kreig is Justice Integrity Project Executive Director and co-founder with over two decades experience as an attorney and non-profit executive in Washington, DC. An author and longtime investigative reporter, his primary focus since 2008 has been exploring allegations of official corruption and other misconduct in federal agencies. He has been a consultant and volunteer leader in advising several non-profit groups fostering cutting-edge applications within the communications industries.
As president and CEO of the Wireless Communications Association International (WCAI) from 1996 until 2008, Kreig led its worldwide advocacy that helped create the broadband wireless industry. Previously, he was WCAI vice president and general counsel, an associate at Latham & Watkins, law clerk to a federal judge, author of the book Spiked about the newspaper business and a longtime reporter for the Hartford Courant.

Listed in Who’s Who in America and Who’s Who in the World from the mid-1990s and currently, he holds law degrees from the University of Chicago School of Law and from Yale Law School. Reared in New York City, his undergraduate degree in history is from Cornell University, where he was a student newspaper editor, rowing team member, and Golden Gloves boxer.

Contact the author Andrew Kreig.



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

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



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

The Empire and the inevitable fall of the Obama criminal regime

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.



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.



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...



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


 photo TAMIFLU_small_zpssojx6okt.jpg

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...



 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 . . .



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.