Click here to submit Tips... contact me... information or news articles you wrote that pertain to this site!
CNN are liars says former CNN reporter
I saw first-hand that these regime claims were lies, and I couldn’t believe CNN was making me put what I knew to be government lies into my reporting.
- Amber Lyon
The Amber Lyon story is just the latest in a series of articles that expose the total Joseph Goebbels like censorship rampant in mainstream media today. The first one I posted several weeks ago exposed how the NY Times basically just regurgitates whatever government officials tell them, while the other showcased how an NPR reporter covering D.C. had to leave and do her own thing out of frustration. This is precisely why alternative media sites are taking off. They provide the only outlets left for genuine journalism.
A shorter edited version of this article by Justin Raimondo, with extensive additional commentary by Lasha Darkmoon on the Israel-Iran situation
ISRAEL, STOP RIGHT THERE!
“This is the first time since the days of Bush Senior that a major player has reminded that ‘shitty little country’ of its littleness. For months, the Israelis have been going around acting like they are the superpower.” — Justin Raimondo
The President of the United States may not have the cojones to stand up to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, but the chairman of the Joint Chiefs does— and he’s doing it!
When Gen. Martin Dempseytold British reporters he did not want the US to be “complicit” in an Israeli attack on Iran, the boys in Tel Aviv were crushed.
For weeks Netanyahu & Co. had been telling anyone who would listen that the US would have no choice but to be sucked into a devastating regional war in the event of an Israeli first strike on Tehran: their tone was almost gleeful. In the absence of a direct response from the White House, it looked like the Israelis had us over a barrel: the American giant, it seemed, was helpless in the face of the Israeli pygmy’s deft manipulations.
Then came Dempsey, whose comments put the kibosh on Israel’s blackmail threats — and threw Netanyahu’s government into a panic.
Said Giora Eiland, national security advisor from 2003 to 2006:
Dempsey’s announcement changed something. His stark comments made clear to the world that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was isolated. And that if he opted for war, he would jeopardize all-important ties with the Jewish state’s closest ally.
“Dempsey’s announcement changed something.” That’s the understatement of the year, perhaps the decade. This is the first time since the days ofGeorge Herbert Walker Bush that a major player has reminded that “shitty little country” of its littleness. For months, the Israelis have been going around acting like they are the superpower, and we are a minuscule dependency relying entirely on our patron’s generosity — and endless forbearance.
“From the days of Jabotinski and Ben Gurion, it has always been the ambition of Zionist fanatics to gain possession of a country stretching from the Nile to the Euphrates, known as “Greater Israel”, and to rule the roost here over 100 million Arab slaves. Greater Israel would then have full control over the Suez Canal and the Persian Gulf, in effect holding the entire world — including the United States — to ransom. As it exists right now, roughly the size of New Jersey, Israel can be wiped off the map in five minutes with a single hydrogen bomb from Russia. Israel must therefore be careful not to goad the Russian bear into a fit of wrath — a fit of wrath which the six million Jews left over in America will have reason to regret.” — Lasha Darkmoon
The Israelis don’t like Dempsey much, and after this they’ll like him much less: in their eyes he’s just a tool of the Obama administration.
Even if this is true, and if Gen. Dempsey is speaking out at the behest of the White House, haven’t we come to a sorry pass when the President of the United States cannot speak in his own name and on his own authority about an issue vital to our national security?
What a testament to the power of the Israel Lobby!
With US military assets in the region vulnerable to an Iranian counterattack, I wouldn’t be surprised if those alleged secret contacts between Washington and Tehran (via European intermediaries) were made at the military’s insistence: the first instinct of a commander, after all, is to protect his troops.
In effect, the Israelis, by constantly threatening a first strike at Tehran, are holding the tens of thousands of US military personnel in the region hostage — because they are likely to be targets of an Iranian counterattack.
With the White House maintaining radio silence on this issue, Dempsey and the generals had no choice but to go public in order to protect American lives.
These impressive Nimitz-class aircraft carriers each come with a full complement of 7–8 supporting ships, 70 or more assorted aircraft, and up to 6000 marines on board. In a 2004 article, military specialist Mark Gaffney, author of Dimona: The Third Temple? (1989), opines: “The US Navy’s largest ships, the massive carriers, have now become floating death traps….In the Gulf’s shallow and confined waters evasive maneuvers will be difficult, at best, and escape impossible….The Gulf will run red with American blood.”
US AIRCRAFT CARRIER . . . VULNURABLE TO ATTACK
With back to back deployments, and two wars without a victory — Iraq and Afghanistan — why would the Pentagon want a third war on its hands?
Little wonder they’re beginning to make their opposition known.
Dempsey can’t be the only soldier who resents taking marching orders from Netanyahu.
He can’t be the only soldier to dread a new war started by a belligerent Israel. This has got to be a restraining factor on the Obama administration. It prevents them from capitulating completely to outrageous Israeli demands.
Obama and the Democrats raised the white flag of surrender to the War Party long ago. Well, let’s hope the peaceniks in the Pentagon can hold the fort.
Here is the most recent edition of the Democratic party platform on the question of war with Iran:
“The President is committed to using all instruments of national power to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons…. President Obama believes that a diplomatic outcome remains the best and most enduring solution. At the same time, he has also made clear that the window for diplomacy will not remain open indefinitely and that all options — including military force — remain on the table. But we have an obligation to use the time and space that exists now to put increasing pressure on the Iranian regime to live up to its obligations and rejoin the community of nations, or face the consequences.”
While the document admits that “the Iranians have yet to build a nuclear weapon”, it goes on to assert that they “cannot demonstrate with any credibility that their program is peaceful.”
Iran, it would seem, is guilty until proven innocent.
How can Iran prove it’s NOT going to nuke Israel with the nuclear weapons it MIGHT have in the future IF it decides to get them? (LD)
The standard of proof is impossible.
The Israelis have set a new standard when it comes to Iran. They insist the red line must be the “breakout” capability, as estimated by Tel Aviv’s strategists, of course: that is, the moment when Tehran can theoretically throw together a nuclear weapon of some sort on very short notice.
The catch is that this point exists in theory only: there is no solid evidence the Iranians are pursuing nuclear weapons, and indeed the official US assessment is that they gave up all such attempts in 2003. There have been all sorts of rumors that a new intelligence assessment was in the works. So far it hasn’t surfaced.
The clear implication is that key elements of the intelligence community are refusing to drink the Israeli Kool-Aid: Dempsey’s dissent is the first clear and unequivocal voice raised against the prospect of fighting an unnecessary war for Israel’s sake.
“It is a mystery why Israelis put Netanyahu in public office instead of in an insane asylum.” — Paul Craig Roberts
Newly released court documents in the Aurora, CO theater “Batman massacre” case reveals startling inside accusations about who may actually be behind the shootings that left at least 70 people either dead or injured in the early morning hours of July 20th.
Friday's report by the online version of Denver's Westword Magazine details shocking claims made by, what appears to be, a new victim in a case that has throttled a community still in mourning over the tragic events. According to the court documents an individual, whose name has been officially redacted from the documents, came forward to file a “Motion to Intervene” for the right to be reasonably heard under the Crime Victims' Rights Act (a)(4), for the purposes of presenting newly discovered evidence to the court.
An article published by The Washington Post on Aug 26 said that weapons imported from China fueled regional conflicts and humanitarian crises in Africa, and said that China's arms exports are not in line with its "responsibilities as a global power".
Such claims are not true and invert justice by calling white black and playing the trick of "a thief covering himself by shouting loud". This attitude is deeply rooted in some westerners' superiority complex.
In fact, those who claim to be "responsible arms traders" are not responsible at all. According to a newly released report by the Congressional Research Service of the United States, the arms export of the US in 2011 reached a record high of $66.3 billion, which accounts for nearly 78 percent of the world's total and is three times higher than 2010's figure.
Where did this huge amount of weapons go?
If you dig in a little, you will find out that nearly half of the weapons were sold to the Middle East region, known by everyone for its volatility and instability. The high-tech weapons include fighter jets, missiles, missile defense interceptors and warships. Such a big flow of advanced weapons undoubtedly has the potential to damage the fragile geopolitical balance of the region, trigger a regional arms race, and subsequently bring suffering to the countries and people there.
To achieve their hidden agendas and serve their own interests, certain states spare no efforts in arming insurgent forces, changing regimes through unwarranted charges, fighting proxy wars and interfering with others' internal affairs.
It is naive to believe that the US is looking at only the Middle East. Actually, US arms dealers are visible in every instable region of the world. Let's take East Asia as an example. In recent years, the US has advocated the establishment of a regional missile defense system to neutralize the hypothetical missile threat of North Korea.
Even though the need and effectiveness of such a system are very much in doubt, US arms dealers would undoubtedly make tremendous profits through selling anti-missile weapon systems -- including the Patriot missile defense system -- to countries in the region. To pave the way for future arms exports, the US even took the risk of escalating regional tensions through military or other interventions under the banner of safeguarding security. Such practices have become a standard pattern for the US government to serve its arms merchants.
One wonders about those countries always criticizing others for fueling regional conflicts and aggravating humanitarian crises through irresponsible arms export. Do they really care about the humanitarian issues? We don't think so.
Audit Of The Fed By The Fed
United States Government Accountability Office
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
Opportunities Exist to Strengthen Policies and Processes for Managing Emergency Assistance
Cost of Chemtrail Program Put At $5 Billion a Year
New study looks at specially adapted aircraft to disperse particles into upper atmosphere
Paul Joseph Watson Infowars.com
Wednesday, September 5, 2012
The cost of a massive program to spray sun-dimming particles into the upper atmosphere in the name of halting global warming, a process some contend is already underway via chemtrails, has been put at just below $5 billion dollars a year.
U.S. scientists writing in the journal Environmental Research Letters concluded that “Planes or airships could carry sun-dimming materials high into the atmosphere for an affordable price tag of below $5 billion a year as a way to slow climate change,” reports Reuters, a process characterized as “both feasible and affordable.”
The cost of using specially adapted aircraft able to operate at high altitudes as a delivery system to disperse sulphur particles was put at $1 to $2 billion a year. Using “giant guns or rockets” would be more expensive.
Co-author Professor Jay Apt of Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh told Reuters that injecting the atmosphere with sulphur but then suddenly removing it from the eco-system could cause temperatures to jump, indicating that the program would have to be ongoing in perpetuity.
The study completely failed to analyze whether such a massive geoengineering program would be a good idea and what environmental consequences it would have.
The latest study follows a similar Carnegie Institution for Science proposal which also advocated spraying the upper atmosphere with aerosols, a process that would “reduce by 20 per cent the amount of sunlight that takes a direct route to the ground” and make blue skies “fade to hazy white,” the New Scientist reported.
Given the fact that most advancements in science and technology are already taking place years before they are disclosed to the public, it stands to reason that geoengineering programs based around spraying the upper atmosphere with particles are already underway, most notably in the form of chemtrails, contrails that linger in the sky for hours and form into artificial clouds.
Scientists now admit that vapor trails from airplanes are creating “artificial clouds” that block out the sun. This is no longer a matter of debate. The chemtrail “conspiracy theorists,” who were ridiculed for pointing out that from the mid-90′s onwards contrails from jet planes were lingering for hours and forming artificial clouds, have been proven correct.
Reading University’s Professor Keith Shine told the Daily Mail that the clouds “formed by aircraft fumes could linger ‘for hours’, depriving those areas under busy flight paths, such as London and the Home Counties, of summer sunshine.”
The report also makes reference to a 2009 Met Office study which found that high-level winds did not disperse contrails that later formed into clouds which covered an astonishing 20,000 miles.
As we have documented, geoengineering programs based around the premise of artificial aerosols were already in operation years ago, including at the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Savannah River National Laboratory in Aiken, S.C, which in 2009 began conducting studies which involved shooting huge amounts of particulate matter, in this case “porous-walled glass microspheres,” into the stratosphere.
Another program under the Department of Energy’s Atmospheric Science Program is directed towards, “developing comprehensive understanding of the atmospheric processes that control the transport, transformation, and fate of energy related trace chemicals and particulate matter.”
The DOE website states that, “The current focus of the program is aerosol radiative forcing of climate: aerosol formation and evolution and aerosol properties that affect direct and indirect influences on climate and climate change.”
These programs are already having the effect of blocking out sunlight. The emergence of the chemtrails phenomenon coincided with an average 22% drop in sunlight reaching the earth’s surface.
In 2008, a KSLA news investigation found that a substance that fell to earth from a high altitude chemtrail contained high levels of Barium (6.8 ppm) and Lead (8.2 ppm) as well as trace amounts of other chemicals including arsenic, chromium, cadmium, selenium and silver. Of these, all but one are metals, some are toxic while several are rarely or never found in nature.
The newscast focuses on Barium, which its research shows is a “hallmark of chemtrails.” KSLA found Barium levels in its samples at 6.8 ppm or “more than six times the toxic level set by the EPA.” The Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality confirmed that the high levels of Barium were “very unusual,” but commented that “proving the source was a whole other matter” in its discussion with KSLA.
KSLA also asked Mark Ryan, Director of the Poison Control Center, about the effects of Barium on the human body. Ryan commented that “short term exposure can lead to anything from stomach to chest pains and that long term exposure causes blood pressure problems.” The Poison Control Center further reported that long-term exposure, as with any harmful substance, would contribute to weakening the immune system.
Spraying sulphur into the upper atmosphere is linked with both environmental catastrophes and human health problems.
The following health effects are linked with exposure to sulphur.
- Neurological effects and behavioral changes
- Disturbance of blood circulation
- Heart damage
- Effects on eyes and eyesight
- Reproductive failure
- Damage to immune systems
- Stomach and gastrointestinal disorder
- Damage to liver and kidney functions
- Hearing defects
- Disturbance of the hormonal metabolism
- Dermatological effects
- Suffocation and lung embolism
Even pro-geoengineering scientist Mark Watson, admits that injecting sulphur into the atmosphere could lead to “acid rain, ozone depletion or weather pattern disruption.”
Rutgers University meteorologist Alan Robock also, “created computer simulations indicating that sulfate clouds could potentially weaken the Asian and African summer monsoons, reducing rain that irrigates the food crops of billions of people.”
“Imagine if we triggered a drought and famine while trying to cool the planet,” Robock told a geoengineering conference in 2010.
The Canada-based Action Group on Erosion, Technology and Concentration (ETC) has called for such experiments to be shut down. “This experiment is only phase one of a much bigger plan that could have devastating consequences, including large changes in weather patterns such as deadly droughts,” the group said in a written statement.
Fred Singer, president of the Science Environmental Policy Project and a skeptic of man-made global warming theories, warns that the consequences of tinkering with the planet’s delicate eco-system could have far-reaching dangers.
“If you do this on a continuous basis, you would depress the ozone layer and cause all kinds of other problems that people would rather avoid,” said Singer.
Even Greenpeace’s chief UK scientist – a staunch advocate of the man-made global warming explanation – Doug Parr – has slammed attempts to geoengineer the planet as “outlandish” and “dangerous”.
Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a regular fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show and Infowars Nightly News.
Wally Butterworth: Americans are the Dumbest People on the Earth.