Charles Jaco was the CNN reporter famous for covering the 1990 Persian Gulf War.
The first part of this video shows the stage set he was on, and he was clowning around with fellow CNN staff. The Saudi Arabian "hotel" in the background were fake palm trees and a blue wall in a studio. This clip was leaked by CNN staff.
The second part of this video was a live CNN satellite feed recorded onto VHS showing the final cut. Charles Jaco was wearing a different jacket, but he had the same act. The acting was terrible as Charles Jaco wore a gas mask, and his fellow correspondent Carl Rochelle wore a helmet. The sirens and missile sound effects are part of the stage set. The camera never pans out or shows the sky.
These clips are the highest quality of this newscast and behind the scenes.
Yes, Charles Jaco was a reporter for CNN. Google his name and read the results.
This is the reason why I don't trust mainstream news. It is all theater and it's completely staged. I only use the news as a guide to get an idea of what is going on, and then I do further research myself.
I also suggest reading the books of Edward Bernays to learn how the media and government fool the masses on an unprecedented scale.
This video is FAIR USE depicting an historical event. I encourage this video to be downloaded, and re-uploaded to other websites to get more people to see this.
Charles Jaco currently works as a reporter for FOX 2 NOW in Saint Louis, Missouri. I highly encourage you to send this video to their newstips inbox here: http://www.fox2now.com/about/station/...
Digg this video, and spread it to the far reaches of the world wide web.
By DAVID FRANCIS, The Fiscal Times on Dec 27, 2010
KANDAHAR CITY -- In its bid to win the hearts and minds of Afghanistan’s teeming population, the United States has spent more than $55 billion to rebuild and bolster the war-ravaged country. That money was meant to cover everything from the construction of government buildings and economic development projects to the salaries of U.S. government employees working closely with Afghans.
Yet no one can say with any authority or precision how that money was spent and who profited from it. Most of the funds were funneled to a vast array of U.S. and foreign contractors. But according to a recent audit by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), there is no way of knowing whether the money went for the intended purposes.
…the United States is not demanding accountability for outgoing funds from U.S. companies which have little incentive to fully disclose where the U.S. money is going.
“The audit shows that navigating the confusing labyrinth of government contracting is difficult, at best,” SIGAR said in releasing the audit. “USAID, the State Department and the Pentagon are unable to readily report on how much money they spend on contracting for reconstruction activities in Afghanistan.”
One large part of the problem is that the United States is not demanding accountability for outgoing funds from U.S. companies which have little incentive to fully disclose where the U.S. money is going. Add to this the many Afghan companies that have minimal accounting capabilities and you have a recipe for a massive misappropriation of funds. The money flows from Washington to Afghanistan, with little oversight and accountability, and at every step along the way someone else takes a cut.
“There’s no mechanism to track where this money is going,” said Scott Amey, general counsel for the Project on Government Oversight, an independent, nonprofit group that investigates government corruption. “Security problems persist and this money doesn’t seem to be accomplishing a real mission.”
As staggering amounts of U.S. tax dollars virtually vanish down a black hole, many of the government projects designed to foster improved relations with the Afghan people and undermine the appeal of the Taliban have fallen far behind schedule or simply aren’t completed. In October, SIGAR found that six Afghan National Police buildings were so poorly built that they are unusable. They were constructed at a cost of $5 million by Basirat Construction, an Afghan construction company.
Afghan contractors often pay kickbacks to local warlords, like Ahmad Wali Karzai, the president’s brother and the so-called “King of Kandahar.”
Another report found that the United States has spent nearly $200 million on Afghan security service buildings that cannot be used. SIGAR also found that the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) couldn’t account for nearly $18 billion that was paid to some 7,000 U.S. and Afghan contractors for development projects. Afghan contractors often pay kickbacks to local warlords, like Ahmad Wali Karzai, the president’s brother and the so-called “King of Kandahar.” Their actions often undermine the work of the coalition.
Botched construction projects aren’t the only U.S. failures. Earlier this summer, coalition forces cleared Malajat, a longstanding Taliban stronghold in the eastern flatlands just outside of Kandahar City. But after they were forced out in September, many of the residents of Malajat remained sympathetic to the Taliban’s cause.
In an effort to project provincial and national authority and strengthen Afghan infrastructure, Canada’s Commander's Emergency Response Program and the USAID ordered the construction of four government buildings in Malajat where local residents could meet with government officials to air grievances. The complex was meant to symbolically supplant Taliban power and influence.
In accordance with U.S. General David Petraeus’ plan to expand contracting awards to Afghan firms, Afghan companies were hired late in September. The contractors then hired Afghan subcontractors to begin construction in the shadow of a fortress built by Alexander the Great around 330 B.C.
Since then, however, little work has been done and the project has fallen behind schedule. As of early November, Afghans earning about a dollar a day had only dug holes for the foundation of the building complex, which was optimistically scheduled to be completed by July.
Work Habits, Cultural Mandates Most Afghans do little work in the winter months. Despite numerous inquiries, U.S. and Canadian officials could not estimate the cost of the project. Gen. Ben Hodges, a former top U.S. commander in Kandahar, told The Fiscal Times that the success of the Kandahar offensive will depend in part on the United States and its allies building Afghan economic, political and security infrastructure over the winter. Projects like the Malajat government building are essential to keeping the Taliban out once the fighting season resumes next spring, especially as the U.S. strategy review has shown tenuous progress here. But there is little confidence among soldiers and development workers that this project will be completed in time.
“We can pour as much money as we want into this and it’s not getting done by the spring,” said an official with the Kandahar Provincial Reconstruction Team (KPRT), a civilian and Canadian-led organization jointly operated with the United States. “These people [Afghan contractors] have no accountability.” Thomas Ford, a spokesman for the KPRT project, said he could not reveal the identities of Afghan contractors involved because of security concerns. He also said he did “not have the exact cost figures in front of [him]”and declined to provide them. Canadian forces, along with KPRT, are scheduled to leave next summer. The United States is expected to assume sole responsibility for their projects.
“…it is likely that some of those funds will unintentionally fuel corruption, finance insurgent organizations, strengthen criminal patronage networks and undermine our efforts in Afghanistan."
Petraeus, commander of the NATO International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) and U.S. Forces Afghanistan, acknowledged in a September memorandum that the contracting process in Afghanistan has been deeply flawed for years and needed to be changed if the Afghan war is to be won.
“With proper oversight, contracting can spur economic development and support the Afghan government and NATO's campaign objectives," wrote Petraeus. "If, however, we spend large quantities of international contracting funds quickly and with insufficient oversight, it is likely that some of those funds will unintentionally fuel corruption, finance insurgent organizations, strengthen criminal patronage networks and undermine our efforts in Afghanistan."
At Kandahar Airfield, a base the size of London’s Heathrow Airport located just outside of Kandahar City, contractors provide transportation, food service, sanitation and construction, among other services. According to a July 2010 Congressional Research Service report, as of last March private contractors made up 57 percent of all personnel in Afghanistan employed by the Department of Defense. "This apparently [represents] the highest recorded percentage of contractors used by DOD in any conflict in the history of the United States," the study found.
According to the report, there were 68,197 Pentagon contractors in Afghanistan, compared with 52,300 uniformed U.S. personnel. Of the Pentagon contractors, 9,300 were U.S. citizens, 52,000 were Afghan, and 7,000 were third-country nationals. There has been a 300 percent increase in contractors since 2007, according to the Defense Contract Management Agency.
Outside of U.S. bases, Afghan firms are primarily employed due to security concerns in places like Kandahar City. As with the Malajat buildings, locals are hired for construction projects that U.S. military commanders have said are key to demonstrating Kabul’s central authority, especially in provinces reluctant to recognize Afghan President Harmid Karzai as their ruler. Afghan contractors have also been hired to help train Afghan police.
As a result of U.S. pressure, the Afghan government recently arrested American Roy Carver, CEO of Red Sea Engineers and Constructors, a company that has received $500 million in Pentagon contracts to construct buildings at U.S. bases. Carver is charged with not paying his Afghan subcontractors.
Amey, of the Project on Government Oversight, said the situation in Afghanistan mirrors the U.S. experience in Iraq: Security concerns made it difficult for foreign contractors to work on the battlefield, forcing reliance on local contractors with little accountability. It’s an endless cycle of frustration and failure.
“It seems as if there wasn’t a lessons- learned approach carrying into Afghanistan, which is not to waste federal taxpayer dollars on contracting projects like this,” Amey said in an interview with The Fiscal Times. “We can build an embassy and things can work around that, but what are we doing around the rest of country? If our money is going to security and the rest is going to impractical projects that aren’t being completed, then the government has to reevaluate the model.”
Chronicles the recurring patterns of disenfranchisement witnessed from 2000 to 2004 while following the story of Georgia Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, who not only took an active role in investigating these election debacles but also found herself in the middle of one after publicly questioning the Bush Administration about the 9-11 terrorist attacks.
On November 9th, 2009 Julian Heicklen went to 500 Pearl St in Manhattan, New York to hand out Fully Informed Jury Association (FIJA http://fija.org) and was arrested after refusing to leave when court police ordered him to do so.
bile of http://blogofbile.com was arrested to filming Julian Heicklen standing in front of the courthouse entrance without permission. At no time was he told to stop recording or that it was a crime. Title 41, Subsection C, § 102-74.420 states that photography of entrances for news purposes are allowed. While not the focus of the footage it is the only part of the property filmed. Camera was confiscated but ultimately only the memory card was taken as evidence.
FIJA Demonstration of November 9, 2009 by Julian Heicklen
Posted on November 10th, 2009 at 8:00am by bile
I arrived at he U. S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, 500 Pearl Street in Manhattan at 11:45 am on Monday, November 9, 2009. The weather was perfect: warm and sunny. I stood in the middle of the plaza in front of the courthouse.
I started to pass out the FIJA pamphlet entitled “A Primer for Prospective Jurors” along with my handout (see below). A freelance reporter form Free Talk Live was present. At 11:48, I was approached by two federal marshals, who identified themselves as Musumeci and Sullivan. They would not give first names and said that they had no badge numbers. They informed me that I had to leave. I demurred. They said that they would have to report me and left.
I passed out about 15 flyers, when three police from the Department of Homeland Security approached me at about 12:20 pm. The leader was my friend Officer Barnes from two weeks ago. After we exchanged the usual pleasantries, he placed me under arrest, and I fell to the ground. He confiscated my remaining five brochures and my JURY INFO sign. He left a receipt and a citation 41 CFR, Sub C Section 102 #74.415(c), the same as two weeks earlier.
During the exchange with the police, the Free Talk Live reporter videotaped the event and interviewed me until he was stopped and cited by the police under 41 CFR, Subsection C, §102–74.420 for photographing without a permit. They confiscated his film.
At about 12:30 pm, while I was still on the ground, Joel Kupferman, a lawyer and Executive Director of the New York Environmental & Justice Project appeared and observed. Then the police left at 12:35 pm. I stood up and the event was over.
We noticed that an NBC reporter was present, but we did not interact with him. Joel and I went to a Chinese soup shop and had hot and sour soup. I arrived home at about 3:15 pm.
Warning: You should know that The Federal Protective Service, and possibly the FBI, is intercepting my e-mails. Another violation of our civil liberties. Be prudent if you write to me.
THE PRICE OF FREEDOM IS ETERNAL VIGILANCE
THE PRICE OF JUSTICE IS ETERNAL PUBLICITY
TITLE 41 C. F. R. Public Contracts and Property Management Subtitle C–FEDERAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS SYSTEM
§ 102-74.415(c)
(c) Distributing materials, such as pamphlets, handbills or flyers, unless conducted as part of authorized Government activities. This prohibition does not apply to public areas of the property as defined in §102–71.20 of this chapter. However, any person or organization proposing to distribute materials in a public area under this section must first obtain a permit from the building manager as specified in subpart D of this part. Any such person or organization must distribute materials only in accordance with the provisions of subpart D of this part. Failure to comply with those provisions is a violation of these regulations.
§ 102-71.25 Who must comply with GSA’s real property policies?
Federal agencies operating under, or subject to, the authorities of the Administrator of General Services must comply with these policies. ______________________________________________________________
THE JUDGE WILL INSTRUCT THE JURY THAT IT MUST UPHOLD THE LAW AS HE GIVES IT.
HE WILL BE LYING. THE JURY MUST JUDGE THE LAW AS WELL AS THE FACTS.
JURIES WERE INSTITUTED TO PROTECT CITIZENS FROM THE TYRANNY OF GOVERNMENT.
IT IS NOT THE DUTY OF THE JURY TO UPHOLD THE LAW.
IT IS THE JURY’S DUTY TO SEE THAT JUSTICE IS DONE.
Arrested for filming the arrest of Julian Heicklen on federal property
(a) Space occupied by a tenant agency for non-commercial purposes only with the permission of the occupying agency concerned;
(b) Space occupied by a tenant agency for commercial purposes only with written permission of an authorized official of the occupying agency concerned; and
(c) Building entrances, lobbies, foyers, corridors, or auditoriums for news purposes.
This is the code under which I was arrested for this afternoon (2009-11-09) at approximately 12:30PM for saying that I do freelance work (for free, though I didn’t make that as clear as I could have) for Free Talk Live while filming the arrest of activist Julian Heicklen. Julian has been arrested the past three Monday’s for refusing to stop handing out FIJA information and brought to a mental hospital each time for unexplained reasons.
I was relaxing near a large stone statue perhaps 100 feet away when Mr. Heicklen entered into a rather large public area in front of the court house at 500 Pearl St. in Manhattan. After he was approached by police I walked up with my primary camera to record the conversation between the two officers (Sullivan and Musumeci) and Julian. I was asked by officer Sullivan (@2009.11.09 00:46:23 in the footage) “You got something to do?” which I replied that I was just observing. The officers ask Julian to leave, Julian offers me jury information and then refuses to leave or give officer Musumeci, who was doing the talking, his name. Musumeci then says “OK, lets call the boss.” and walks away. I took the information Julian handed me and then walked 20 to 30 feet away to the side of the area near a lamp post and read through the pamphlet.
After done reading the information (2009.11.09 01:10:19) I approached Mr. Heicklen again and performed a brief interview.
Right after the interview and a brief chat with Julian the officers approached us and I was asked by the arresting officer, C. Barnes #245, who I worked for and Julian informed them and me that I didn’t need to tell them. I step back from the immediate area of the arrest while filming.
After going through Julian’s belongings and then removing some of them from his person officer C. Barnes #245 approaches me and asks who I work for. Not aware of the statute above I said a news agency referring to Free Talk Live (which it’s not but “radio talk show” didn’t mediately come to mind) who informs it’s listeners to use them if questioned in such a manner. I’m then told of the statute and that I’m now under arrest for breaking it. I knew better. I should have stayed quiet. Never talk to the police. C. Barnes #245 gave me no real ability to explain my relationship with FTL and interrupted me as I attempted to explain. Officer Sullivan also spoke at the same time making it difficult to figure out what was going on or who to listen to especially when both had their hands on me. I was accused of not having a press card without them actually checking or asking for one.
My hands are placed behind my back, my camera taken by a plain clothed officer and officer C. Barnes #245 asks if I need to be cuffed. I say no and he tells me to sit on the flowerbed edge. He asks for a state ID. I tell him I don’t have one and ask if I’m required to carry one. He states that on federal property I must (can someone confirm or deny this?) and then threatens to take me to jail so to obtain fingerprints. Telling me that I’d be free in a few days when the results came back. Not wanting to sit in jail I offer him my Free Talk Live press badge which he accepts.
I sit down and check my cell phone to see the time. The plain clothed officer gives me grief for doing so asking to see the phone and to tell him what I just did with it. I inform him I just checked the time and he allows me to put it away. He then tells me I should have just stopped recording when I was asked. Officer C. Barnes #245 and I inform him that I was never asked to stop recording. After a moment I try to break the tension by commenting on the quality of the camera after seeing the plain clothed officer checking it out.
The citation is filled out and I am asked to sign the ticket but told I may refuse to do so. I should have asked the consequences for not doing so but it slipped my mind. After reading the ticket over I signed adding “under duress” at the end.
Then on to the camera. It’s being kept as evidence that I filmed and broke the above rule. At no time during this event was I asked to stop recording or was asked to show that I had in fact recorded anything. I also did not see the arresting officer confirm I had recorded anything. He was processing me and the plain clothed officer had the camera. At one point (@2009.11.09 01:20:00) the plain clothed officer opens the camera, turns it on and starts meddling with it. I ask what he’s looking for and he tells me I’m not permitted to record on federal property without permission which was obvious given I was just arrested for that. He then shuts the camera and tells me I couldn’t film the arrest and officers. I make the claim that there is nothing wrong with doing so and he gets snippy with me sarcastically asking me if I know the law. I ask him if he knows the law, the exact statutes, and he tells me not to worry about it and to sit down.
A man who noticed the going on stopped to witness what was going on and is asked to step back but otherwise left un-harassed.
At 2009.11.09 01:26:36 I ask C. Barnes #245 about the expected length of time between now and when I should expect a court date. After telling me 60 to 90 days I repeat in surprise the length and he says “It’s the federal government. What do you expect?”
A receipt is retrieved for C. Barnes #245 by the plain clothed officer for my camera and when told the camera is going to be held for evidence I ask if only the memory card could be since it’s a purely external flash based devices with no internal memory. C. Barnes #245 accepts that and the plain clothed officer starts to take out the card but then C. Barnes #245 instructs him to have me do it instead. C. Barnes #245 takes the chip and copies down the serial number on it’s back, gives me a copy of the receipt. He never had me sign it and it slipped my mind.
I ask the plain clothed officer for his information but he deflects the questions telling me he’s not really involved and I don’t need it. Given his snarky attitude I didn’t want to push it and left it be. I’m told at some point by C. Barnes #245 that had I been on the sidewalk I would have been fine though I’m not sure that’s true given my understanding of the statute above.
After everything was done regarding my arrest I walked over to Julian and the observer (later identified as Joel Kupferman, a lawyer and Executive Director of the New York Environmental & Justice Project.) We chatted about the situation for a few minutes and then parted ways.
Footage will be posted shortly. Note that the timestamps are incorrect. I was released by police and walked over to Julian and Joel at about 12:35PM meaning the arrests took place about 12:20PM.
Settlement with Department of Homeland Security reached
Posted on October 18th, 2010 at 12:44pm by bile
If you lived in New York City you could carry this 2009-04-03 NYPD Operations Order around to help protect yourself from NYPD officers harassing you for filming around the city.
If you were on “Federally Owned and Leased Facilities”, specifically land used by the DOT, you could use this bulletin to try to scare off the DHS.
The DHS admits that the § 102-74.420 does not “prohibit individuals from photographing (including motion photography) the exterior of federal courthouses from publicly accessible spaces, such as streets, sidewalks, parks and plazas; and FPS has not construed any other federal regulation or federal statute to prohibit such photography of the exterior of federal courthouses, though it makes no representation about local rules or orders.”
“FPS will provide a written instruction to its officers and employees engaged in law enforcement, stating that for federal courthouses under the protective jurisdiction of FPS, there are currently no general security regulations prohibiting exterior photography by individuals from publicly accessible spaces, absent a written local rule, regulation, or order. The instruction will also inform FPS officers and employees of the public’s general right to photograph the exterior of federal courthouses from publicly accessible spaces.”
“Nothing in this agreement precludes FPS or the United States, or any department, agency, agent, officer , or employee of the United States (collectively, the “Government”) or any law-enforcement officer from taking any legally permissible law-enforcement action, including but not limited to approaching any individual taking photographs and asking for the voluntary provision of information such as the purpose of taking the photographs or the identity of the individual, or taking lawful steps to ascertain whether unlawful activity, or reconnaissance for the purpose of a terrorist or unlawful act is being undertaken.”
FPS will pay the plaintiff $1500.
FPS will pay $3350 in legal fees.
I’ll get my memory card back when Julian Heicklen’s case is over.
NYCLU Settlement Ends Restriction on Photography Outside Federal Courthouses
October 18, 2010 — In settling a lawsuit filed by the New York Civil Liberties Union, the federal government today recognized the public’s right to take photographs and record videos in public spaces outside federal courthouses throughout the nation.
The settlement comes after the NYCLU sued the federal government in April on behalf of a Libertarian activist who was unlawfully arrested by federal officers after exercising his First Amendment right to record digital video outside of a federal courthouse in Lower Manhattan.
“This settlement secures the public’s First Amendment right to use cameras in public spaces without being harassed,” NYCLU Executive Director Donna Lieberman said. “While we understand the need for heightened security near federal buildings, any rule that results in the arrest of people for exercising their First Amendment rights is clearly unconstitutional. We’re pleased the federal government finally recognizes this fact.”
Plaintiff Antonio Musumeci was arrested on Nov. 9, 2009 after using a hand-held camera to record a protestor in a public plaza outside the Daniel Patrick Moynihan Federal Courthouse in Manhattan.
During the arrest, federal officers forced Musumeci to the pavement and confiscated video from his camera. Musumeci, a software developer for an investment bank, was detained for about 20 minutes and issued a ticket for violating a federal regulation. That charge was later dismissed.
On two subsequent occasions, federal officers threatened Musumeci with arrest after trying to record protests at the courthouse.
“The courthouse plaza is public property paid for by taxpayers, and the public should not be prohibited from using video cameras there. Now people now can freely express their First Amendment right there without being harassed and arrested by federal officers,” said Musumeci, a resident of Edgewater, N.J.
In the settlement approved today by a federal judge in Manhattan, , the federal government acknowledges that there are no federal laws or regulations that prohibit photography outside federal courthouses. It agreed to provide federal officers written instructions emphasizing the public’s right to photograph and record outside federal courthouses. The settlement has even broader implications, though.
“Not only will this settlement end harassment of photographers outside federal courthouses, it will free people to photograph and film outside of all federal buildings,” said NYCLU Associate Legal Director Christopher Dunn, lead counsel in the case. “The regulation at issue in this case applies to all federal buildings, not only courthouses, so this settlement should extend to photography near all federal buildings nationwide.
By FR. RAYMOND G. HELMICK & DR. NAZIR KHAJA from arabnews.com
Israel's ability to shape public opinion regarding the flotilla massacre is intimately linked to its long-standing campaign to manipulate global public perceptions of what has been happening in Palestine all along since Israel's birth in 1947.
Its policy remains consistent. It is a successful strategy always focusing on Jewish victimhood. The success is rooted in a political reality. Where knowledge is limited, and the desire and means to learn and understand the complex reality or issues doesn't exist, public opinion can be manipulated and shaped by whoever generates the most powerful symbols. The precise truth or falsehood of this portrayal hardly matters. For most of the world thus far, the Palestine issue is poorly understood and not a matter of immediate concern. The manipulators intend to shape the perceptions of a global public with limited interest in or understanding of the issues, filling in the blanks with their own narrative. Their use of the media is a powerful political weapon designed to define perceptions. Using an amalgam of incidents and images to display, a propaganda war is being waged to create sympathy.
The moral question has been made ambiguous.
What seems to matter is the ability to identify the victim as victimizer through obfuscation and confusion thus helping form global opinion that would lead members of the international community to adopt political stances advantageous to the opinion managers.
Israel's success in establishing its own narrative in the public sphere as the dominant one is in no small measure due to the excellence of the Jewish community in the media field. Moving stories made into movies like the "Exodus" and many others are poignant accounts of Jewish suffering. It is equally important to recognize the Palestinian/Arab inability to offer their own narrative in a coherent constructive way
Times have changed. Because of plethora of technologies now there are opportunities for many to present alternative ideas and counternarratives and be heard across this planet... The ground seems to be shifting.
The flotilla incidence has gotten the State of Israel in a pickle. Though all its faithful propagandists are out in public arguing that there was nothing wrong with the raid on the ships carrying aid to Gaza, and the American media are straining every which way and even very much against their better instincts, to cooperate, they are not succeeding in making a dent in the public perception. There remains in the minds of most people across the globe the perception that things truly shocking and fundamentally unacceptable took place out there on the high seas.
Eyewitness accounts have begun to come back from those arrested on the ships. With all clarity it is apparent that the Israeli forces did their best to pre-empt the account of the story, giving thereby prima facie evidence of careful planning for exactly what happened. They took care to cut off all communication from those ships at sea except their own. All cameras, electronic devices that could hold any pictures or video were confiscated and have not been returned. That was an accomplishment, as practically everyone on board had cameras and recording devices. It was only by hiding away a few of those tiny memory cards that passengers were able to retain any of the horrifying pictures and video that are now beginning to emerge. Even now, few people have seen those other than on Internet postings. Our America media are not publishing them.
Passengers were kept incommunicado for the period of the first few days during which these events could be expected to hold the attention of the news cycle. They were all initially detained at Ashdod, but quickly transferred to a special prison that had been prepared for them in advance near Beersheba, far from anywhere that outside reporters had accesses to.
Several journalists, now finally beginning to talk, were on the ship, and the Israelis' first action was to put a gun to the head of the lead Turkish organizer of reporting, and kill him instantly. He was one of the five killed by shots to the head at point blank range. The one 19-year-old Turk among the killed, Furkan Dogan, who happened to have joint American citizenship, was shot five times at a range of less than 45 centimeters, once in the face, once in the back of the head, twice in the leg and once in the back. The main Internet man in the media room was also shot in the head. The Turkish forensic people who were able to examine the bodies of the dead once they were finally returned report that some had been shot as many as thirty times.
All the passengers were thrown into terrified panic as these events so suddenly unfolded. None had expected that the effort to prevent their getting to Gaza would be so savage and violent. Even the resistance put up by a few passengers as the first Israeli paratroopers arrived on deck was sporadic and unplanned. The descending soldiers were disarmed. The guns taken from them were not discharged but were thrown into the sea. The Israelis who had been overpowered - they had evidently expected no resistance - were promptly given medical attention by a Turkish doctor on board, Dr. Hasan Huseyin Uysal, and were turned over to the Israelis at once as more arrived from the boats. Wounded defenders were dragged by the Israelis below decks out of sight. Medical attention was denied to them for a matter of hours and several of the deaths resulted from this wanton refusal of treatment.
The terrified passengers were then confined on land in crowded facilities, refused access to toilets, many of them beaten and abused. It was demanded of them all that they sign confessions for entering Israel illegally, but they refused on the basis that they had had no intention of entering Israel but had been trying to enter supposedly independent Gaza. They saw themselves as kidnapped or abducted at sea and brought to Israel against their will. Holding them proved such an embarrassment to the Israelis that after a few days the Turks were allowed to land planes that took them out of the country.
More details of Israeli excesses are emerging and will continue. But the question is what is happening subsequently. Zeev Sternhell's editorial in the Haaretz newspaper, titled "Time to pay the bill," sees it as an unprecedented crisis, "the last link in a long chain of failures and acts of folly," which deprives Israel of the standing it has so long held as "a responsible and level-headed power." He cites acts of restraint by Israel in earlier conflicts, but regards Benjamin Netanyahu, Ehud Barak, Moshe Ya'alon and Avigdor Lieberman as belonging to a different species of politician, one that cannot be relied on, with the consequence that the world - even the United States - will no longer allow Israel to function without supervision and an effective kind of pressure. It can no longer be assumed that any action of Israel is justified by the very fact that Israel has done it. It is not surprising that Ehud Barak, defense minister and therefore responsible for the actions of the Israeli military, has apparently had to cancel a visit to Paris for fear of arrest over this episode.
The UN Security Council has deplored "the acts which led to" all this violence, leaving it a bit up in the air whose violence it was talking about, but the Obama administration has called the whole siege situation in Gaza unsustainable and called, in the words of the UN resolution, for a credible investigation, urging that it be more than an internal investigation of themselves by the Israeli military.
The Israelis, though, blandly announce that they will do just that, an internal investigation that will convince no one who is not already determined to be convinced... Netanyahu government's decision to establish the Tirkel Commission which is supposed to probe the lethal raid on the Gaza Flotilla is a deliberate attempt to appease the international condemnation and outrage over the incidence. The commission is required to function only within the parameters that Netanyahu government has laid out. The commission is specifically and explicitly excluded from calling any soldier or officer to testify. It must place a blind trust in the army's own investigation of its own doings, which is carried on secretly and whose pre-selected results will be presented to the commission. And it is highly unlikely that the commission would hear and seriously consider the eyewitness testimonies of the boat's Turkish, European and American passengers, whom the State of Israel already branded as "terrorists".
And in that context our President Obama, as clearly as he evidently sees all this and anxious as he is to have a proper and credible investigation by others than those who carried out the raid themselves, is now urged to temper any even implicit criticism of Israel over it and recite the Israeli propaganda line, with threats of political consequences if he does not obey. What a fearful new embarrassment for the United States should he do so, how discrediting before the entire world that knows better, how disheartening a real disservice to any good for the Israelis!
Hamas, of course, could make it very easy for Obama to bow this way before Israeli demands, by initiating some vengeful act that would further poison the world's perception of them and their cause, or even some spate of invective or inflammatory rhetoric that would adversely color the situation.
The president hopefully will unequivocally endorse the demand of the international community for an independent inquiry. He should not be blindsided by the propaganda war or internal political pressures.
This should be his moral commitment.
- Fr. Raymond G. Helmick, S.J. is instructor in conflict resolution, Department of Theology, Boston College and author of Negotiating Outside the Law: Why Camp David Failed (London, Pluto Press 2004). Dr. Nazir Khaja is a peace activist, chairman of Islamic Information Service, Los Angeles. Nazir.khaja@gmail.com. Both authors have been members of Middle-East Peace delegations with Rev. Jesse Jackson and others on a number of occasions and have met the Palestinian leadership. http://wakeupfromyourslumber.com/blog/sullivan/israels-propaganda-war
ETHICAL DONATORS AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS REQUIRED, TO FILL THIS SPACE WITH YOUR POLITICAL SLOGANS, ADVERTISING
OFFERS, WEBSITE DETAILS, CHARITY REQUESTS, LECTURE OPPORTUNITIES,
EDUCATIONAL WORKSHOPS, SPIRITUAL AND/OR HEALTH ENLIGHTENMENT COURSES.
AS
AN IMPORTANT MEMBER OF THE GLOBAL INDEPENDENT MEDIA COMMUNITY, MIKIVERSE POLITICS HONOURABLY REQUESTS YOUR HELP TO KEEP YOUR NEWS, DIVERSE,AND FREE OF
CORPORATE, GOVERNMENT SPIN AND CONTROL.
As a longtime feminist activist, I have been overjoyed to discover your new commitment to engaging in global manhunts to arrest and prosecute men who behave like narcissistic jerks to women they are dating.
I see that Julian Assange is accused of having consensual sex with two women, in one case using a condom that broke. I understand, from the alleged victims' complaints to the media, that Assange is also accused of texting and tweeting in the taxi on the way to one of the women's apartments while on a date, and, disgustingly enough, 'reading stories about himself online' in the cab.
Both alleged victims are also upset that he began dating a second woman while still being in a relationship with the first. (Of course, as a feminist, I am also pleased that the alleged victims are using feminist-inspired rhetoric and law to assuage what appears to be personal injured feelings. That's what our brave suffragette foremothers intended!).
Thank you again, Interpol. I know you will now prioritize the global manhunt for 1.3 million guys I have heard similar complaints about personally in the US alone – there is an entire fraternity at the University of Texas you need to arrest immediately. I also have firsthand information that John Smith in Providence, Rhode Island, went to a stag party – with strippers! – that his girlfriend wanted him to skip, and that Mark Levinson in Corvallis, Oregon, did not notice that his girlfriend got a really cute new haircut – even though it was THREE INCHES SHORTER.
Psychophrenes writes "A new episode in French internet legislation — French ministers have passed a bill (original in French) allowing the government to add any website to a black list, which access providers will have to enforce. This black list will be defined by the government only, without requiring the intervention of the legal system. Although originally intended against pedo-pornographic websites, this bill is already outdated, as was Hadopi in its time, and instead paves the way for a global censorship of the 'French internet.'"
"Proof that the NEW WORLD ORDER has been planned by the elite. Robert Welch, Founder of The John Birch Society, predicted today's problems with uncanny accuracy back in 1958 and prescribed solutions in 1974 that are very similar to Ron Paul's positions today. This is proof that there are plans in place by the elite to systemically disassemble US sovereignty."
"FOX NEWS HAS FLAGGED THIS VIDEO ALREADY. I AM DISPUTING IT ON FAIR USE GROUNDS ***This video is for educational and information purposes, as most people know nothing about Greece, let alone what is happening there.*** We Are The People, Join Us While You Still Can A PlanetaryGovernment Production - if you take my video down i will upload it to several sites a week , please feel free to re - upload my original videos or use them for any purpose , check my play list for all my original productions like this video , please take my video and re - upload it !! Video Credit To: http://www.youtube.com/user/Planetary...
Unless you are paying attention you wouldn't know the entire European economy is collapsing, starting with Greece. A group of several thousand protestors gathered outside parliament in Greece on Thursday to protest against austerity measures recently announced by the government.
This comes at a time when the final vote on the austerity measures and bailout is imminent in the chamber.
The protests follows mass demonstrations Wednesday where tens of thousands took to the streets amid a general strike that paralyzed the country.
The protests Wednesday descended into violence leading to the death of three employees when a central Athenian bank branch was fire bombed by an anarchist youth group. RAW Athens Greece Rioters 2010 Protests strike tear gas police riot gear economy euro collapse Thousands Of Protestors Gather Outside Greek Parliament violence employee fire bomb demonstration general bailout austerity
Πανεργατική Απεργία 5 Μάη 2010 στην Αθήνα. Πλάνα από μπλοκ πρωτοβάθμιων σωματείων. Πανεργατική Απεργία 5 Μάη 2010 πρωτοβάθμια σωματεία ΑΝΤΑΡΣΥΑ Νέο Αριστερό Ρεύμα συγκρούσεις κυβέρνηση ΠΑΣΟΚ greece crisis greek riots may 2010 greece general strike rgia geniki gsee adedy EE International Monetary fund ECU
A group of WikiLeaks supporters crashed credit card giant Visa's website, hours after a similar attack on MasterCard.
The loosely connected group, which calls itself Anonymous, claimed responsibility on a Twitter feed and elsewhere. The group, which has no central command structure, has dubbed the attacks "operation payback".
The two-pronged attack came as both companies stopped processing donations to WikiLeaks on Tuesday. Access to both sites was intermittent this morning.
PayPal, which also put a block on WikiLeaks' account, came under attack this afternoon and its US site, paypal.com, was temporarily inaccessible.
Visa acknowledged the cyber attack on its website and reassured cardholders that no customer data had been put at risk.
"Visa's corporate website - Visa.com - is currently experiencing heavier than normal traffic," the company said in a statement. "The company is taking steps to restore the site to full operations within the next few hours."
Visa said its processing network that handled cardholder transactions was functioning normally.
"Cardholders can continue to use their cards as they routinely would," Visa said. "Account data is not at risk."
Earlier, the Swedish prosecutor's office came under cyber attack as WikiLeaks supporters vowed to retaliate for the arrest of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.
The Swedish prosecution authority, whose arrest order for Mr Assange over accusations of sexual offences led a British court to remand the 39-year-old in custody, said it had reported the online attack to police.
"Of course, it's easy to think it has a connection with WikiLeaks but we can't confirm that," prosecution authority web editor Fredrik Berg told Reuters Television.
Assange supporters also went for MasterCard in apparent retaliation for its blocking of donations to the WikiLeaks website.
"We are glad to tell you that http://www.mastercard.com/ is down and it's confirmed!" said an entry on the AnonOps Twitter feed of Anonymous, which says it fights against censorship and "copywrong".
Mark Stephens, Mr Assange's principal lawyer in London, denied that the WikiLeaks founder had ordered the cyber strikes. Mr Assange "did not give instructions to hack" the company websites, Mr Stephens told Reuters.
'Concentrated effort'
MasterCard said its systems had not been compromised by what it called "a concentrated effort to flood our corporate website with traffic and slow access".
"We are working to restore normal service levels," the company said in a statement. "It is important to note that our systems have not been compromised and there is no impact on our cardholders' ability to use their cards for secure transactions globally."
Mr Assange spent the night in a British jail and will appear for a hearing on December 14.
Mr Assange, who has lived periodically in Sweden, was accused this year of sexual misconduct by two female Swedish WikiLeaks volunteers. The pair's lawyer said their claims were not a politically motivated plot against Mr Assange.
"It has nothing to do with WikiLeaks or the CIA," said lawyer Claes Borgstrom, whose website also came under cyber attack, according to officials.
Mr Assange has angered US authorities and triggered headlines worldwide by publishing the secret cables.
Australian Foreign Affairs Minister Kevin Rudd said the people who originally leaked the documents, not Mr Assange, were legally liable and the leaks raised questions over the "adequacy" of US security.
"Mr Assange is not himself responsible for the unauthorised release of 250,000 documents from the US diplomatic communications network," Mr Rudd told Reuters in an interview.
"The Americans are responsible for that," said Rudd, described in one leaked US cable as a "control freak".
US State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley conceded that "the fundamental responsibility for the leak rests inside the US government where we believe a crime has been committed".
"But just as clearly, what Julian Assange is doing by releasing these classified documents is putting real lives and real interests at risk," Mr Crowley said in an email message.
Carry on
WikiLeaks vowed it would continue releasing details of the confidential US cables. Only a fraction of them have been published so far.
Mr Assange has become the public face of WikiLeaks, hailed by supporters including campaigning Australian journalist John Pilger and British filmmaker Ken Loach as a defender of free speech, but he is now battling to clear his name.
Some supporters appear to want to help him. While most denial of service attacks involve botnets, programs that hijack computers and use them to target individual websites and bring them down, the current cyber attacks seem to be different.
Mikko Hypponen, chief research officer of Finnish software security firm F-Secure, said: "In this case ... they seem to be using their own computers."
When asked what that said about how many individuals might be involved, he replied: "Probably hundreds at the least, could be thousands."
PayPal said it had acted at the behest of the US government.
"On November 27, the State Department, the US government basically, wrote a letter saying that the WikiLeaks activities were deemed illegal in the United States and as a result our policy group had to make the decision of suspending the account," Osama Bedier, PayPal's vice-president of platform and emerging technology, told a conference in Paris.
Swiss PostFinance, the banking arm of state-owned Swiss Post, which also closed a WikiLeaks donation account, said it had taken countermeasures and an earlier wave of cyber attacks appeared to be waning.
"The community around Julian Assange have said 'We're leaving it now, we've shown what we can do,'" PostFinance spokesman Alex Josty said.
New revelations continue
The latest cables, reported in Britain's Guardian newspaper, said Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi made threats to cut trade with Britain and warned of "enormous repercussions" if the Libyan convicted of the 1988 Lockerbie airline bombing died in a Scottish jail. He was freed in August last year.
WikiLeaks also released cables on Wednesday that showed Saudi Arabia proposed an "Arab army" be deployed in Lebanon, with US air and naval cover, to stop the Shiite Hezbollah militia after it seized control of parts of Beirut in 2008.
Like many of the cables, the disclosures give an insight into diplomacy which is normally screened from public view.
The original source of the leaked cables is not known, though a US army private, Bradley Manning, who worked as an intelligence analyst in Iraq, has been charged by military authorities with unauthorised downloading of more than 150,000 State Department cables.
US officials have declined to say whether those cables are the same ones now being released by WikiLeaks.
Reuters with AP and Chris Zappone, BusinessDay
This story was found at: http://www.theage.com.au/business/world-business/assange-supporters-bring-down-visa-mastercard-sites-20101209-18q5m.html
Visitors to the senator's Wikipedia page this morning may have been surprised to learn his role as Minister for Social Housing and Homelessness, among other portfolios, had been usurped by some decidedly more colourful titles.
CIA agent, US Mole, Traitor, and US Embassy Hero were listed below the right-wing Labor powerbroker's photograph on the popular online encyclopedia following revelations by WikiLeaks today that Mr Arbib was as a confidential contact of the United States embassy in Canberra.
And the Wikipedia tinkering didn't stop there.
''Mark Victor Arbib (born 9 November 1971) is an Australian Traitor and spy for America,'' his Wikipedia page read just after 4am AEDT today.
''He will join Benedict Arnold and Judas in the afterlife. He is a public enemy and a villain to his people.''
Benedict Arnold, who was also listed on Mr Arbib's page as his predecessor, was a general during the American Revolutionary War who later defected to the British Army.
A short time later his page was also altered to read: ''On 8 December 2010 it was revealed by the Wikileaks cables that Arbib had traitorously met with US embassy officials on numerous occasions to inform them of internal party and parliamentary workings.''
In fact, Mr Arbib's page was altered 18 times over six hours this morning, before moderators reverted the page due to ''vandalism by multiple editors''.
Just before 7am, his page was listed as ''protected'' due to ''excessive violations of the biographies of living persons policy''.
Anyone may submit an entry to Wikipedia and anyone may either add to, or edit, any entry.
This has led to doubts about the accuracy of many entries, although the moderators on the site are known to do their best to keep everyone honest and objective.
In 2007 bureaucrat spin doctors in Canberra were "outed" for editing Wikipedia entries critical of their bosses.
This story was found at: http://www.theage.com.au/technology/technology-news/mark-arbib-aka-cia-agent-007-20101209-18q50.html
Assange 'unlikely' to be extradited to US WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is 'very unlikely' to be extradited to the US from Britain according to a US national security law expert.
FEDERAL minister and right-wing Labor powerbroker Mark Arbib has been revealed as a confidential contact of the United States embassy in Canberra, providing inside information and commentary for Washington on the workings of the Australian government and the Labor Party.
Secret US embassy cables obtained by WikiLeaks and made available exclusively to The Age reveal that Senator Arbib, one of the architects of Kevin Rudd's removal as prime minister, has been in regular contact with US embassy officers.
His candid comments have been incorporated into reports to Washington with repeated requests that his identity as a ''protected'' source be guarded.
Advertisement: Story continues below
Mark Arbib Photo: Andrew Sheargold
Embassy cables reporting on the Labor Party and national political developments, frequently classified "No Forn" - meaning no distribution to non-US personnel - refer to Senator Arbib as a strong supporter of Australia's alliance with the US.
They identify him as a valuable source of information on Labor politics, including Mr Rudd's hopes to forestall an eventual leadership challenge from then deputy prime minister Julia Gillard.
"He understands the importance of supporting a vibrant relationship with the US while not being too deferential. We have found him personable, confident and articulate,'' an embassy profile on Senator Arbib written in July 2009 says. "He has met with us repeatedly throughout his political rise.''
Other Labor politicians reported in US embassy cables as regular contacts include former federal MP and minister Bob McMullan and Michael Danby, the Labor member for Melbourne Ports.
A former secretary of the New South Wales branch of the Labor Party, Senator Arbib was a key backroom figure in the Labor ''coup'' in June that resulted in Mr Rudd being replaced by Ms Gillard as PM.
He has been a senator since July 2008 and was made a parliamentary secretary in February 2009. Mr Rudd elevated him to the ministry in June 2009. He currently holds the ministerial portfolios of Sport, Indigenous Employment, and Social Housing and Homelessness.
Instructed to find out how decisions were made in the government, US diplomats were quick to focus on Senator Arbib as a "right-wing powerbroker and political rising star'' who had made "a quick transition from the parliamentary backrooms into the ministry''.
The US embassy noted that ''the New South Wales Labor party's kingmaker'' was integral in raising numbers for Mr Rudd to overthrow Kim Beazley as Labor leader in 2006, and that Senator Arbib was "a close adviser to Rudd and is his key conduit to the ALP factions''.
"Arbib is an influential factional operator who has forged strong political connections with Rudd,'' the embassy recorded. "We have been told that Rudd respects Arbib's political expertise, and a contact noted that Arbib is brought into Rudd's inner circle when politically important decisions are made.
"Arbib is said to be loyal to, but frank with, Rudd, and is one of Rudd's closest advisers. Yet, publicly, Arbib has denied being part of Rudd's inner circle."
US diplomats also found that Arbib "is an astute observer and able conversant on the nuts and bolts of US politics''.
Senator Arbib first appears as a contributor to US embassy political reporting while he was NSW Labor state secretary. In May 2006 he declared to US diplomats that Australia was at risk of becoming a ''quarry for the Chinese and a tourist destination for the Japanese''.
He warned that it would be "a tough struggle for the Labor Party to win the federal elections in 2007''. But he thought Kim Beazley, because he was the opposite of the volatile Mark Latham, was ''the right man to lead the ALP at the present time''.
However, he also told embassy officers that, unlike Mr Beazley, he supported Australia's military commitment in Iraq "as well as the war on terrorism in general''.
After the Rudd government's election in 2007, Senator Arbib offered reassurance about then deputy prime minister Gillard's political leanings, describing her as "one of the most pragmatic politicians in the ALP''.
He also confirmed Mr Rudd's tendencies towards micromanagement and told the embassy that "Rudd's staff would like to get their boss to spend less time on foreign policy and delegate more, but that they recognise that this is a hopeless task''.
In October 2009, as Mr Rudd's popular support began to sag, Senator Arbib openly canvassed emerging leadership tensions within the government, telling US envoys that Mr Rudd wanted "to ensure that there are viable alternatives to Gillard within the Labor Party to forestall a challenge''.
Senator Arbib added that Mr Rudd still appreciated Ms Gillard's strengths, while an another unidentified adviser to the Labor prime minister told US diplomats that "while the PM respects Gillard, his reluctance to share power will eventually lead to a falling-out, while Gillard will not want to acquiesce in creating potential rivals''.
In June this year, Senator Arbib and other Labor Right figures moved to depose Mr Rudd from the leadership, precipitating the events that led to Ms Gillard's becoming Prime Minister.
Senator Arbib last night declined to comment on the WikiLeaks disclosures.
Over the weekend, while hosting the largest intelligence leak in history, WikiLeaks was hit by a distributed denial of service attack. Someone, it seemed, was trying to silence the whistleblowing website.
Thanks to the internet’s flexible architecture, however, WikiLeaks was able to quickly shift its weight to Amazon.com’s Elastic Cloud Computing (EC2) servers, ensuring that the 250,000 leaked diplomatic cables remained online. Earlier today, reports circulated that Amazon had bowed to political pressure from US lawmakers and booted WikiLeaks off its servers. And yet, WikiLeaks remains online as I am writing this, having presumably moved to yet another cluster of servers.
WikiLeaks endurance illustrates why the internet’s decentralised nature has made it such a valuable platform for the dissemination of information. To attempt to take a site like WikiLeaks down is to engage in a pointless game of whack-a-mole; no matter how many times you shut the site down, it will always pop up again elsewhere. And yet, WikiLeaks and sites like it do have another point of vulnerability, one that is increasingly being targeted by governments: their web addresses or urls.
In order to visit WikiLeaks, most of us would point our browser to WikiLeaks.org. Unlike the internet itself, the administration of top-level domains – such as .org, .com, .net and .uk – is surprisingly centralised. The top-level domain name space, in which such domains reside, is managed by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (Icann), a US-based non-profit organisation. Icann oversees the creation of new domains and assigns administration of these domains to various parties. The .com domain, for example, is administered by the American company VeriSign, while the .uk domain is administered by the UK non-profit, Nominet UK.
This centralisation of domains provides an attractive target for those seeking to silence free speech and dissent on the web. In the US, a group of senators has introduced a bill known as the Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (Coica) that aims to expand the American government’s power over domain names. If passed, the bill would allow the US government to shut down domains that are managed in the US (.com and .net domains, for example) and demand that American ISPs not connect users to domains administered elsewhere in the world.
As its name implies, Coica is being peddled as a solution for combating the sale of counterfeit goods online. However, if granted the ability to seize and censor domains at whim, one imagines that the American government might be tempted to use its newfound ability for other purposes – including suppressing sensitive documents like those made available by WikiLeaks.
If you’re wondering what this kind of seizure would look like in practice, you need look no further than this week’s news. This past Monday, in a show of force timed to coincide with “cyber Monday” – the year’s largest day for online shopping – the US department of homeland security seized some 82 domains, most of which belonged to sites trading in counterfeit goods. A few of the sites whose domains were seized, however, were not involved in counterfeiting. Two popular hip-hop websites – OnSmash.com and dajaz1.com – had their domains pulled due to accusations of copyright infringement. These sites, which hosted hip-hop mixtapes and which have been cited as contributing to the recent success of major-label recording artists like Kanye West, claim to have been in compliance with the law by responding to takedown notices received from record labels and other rightsholders. As of this writing, however, both sites still redirect to a stern warning notice from the department of homeland security. While the legality of these seizures in the absence of Coica is a matter of debate, the message sent by the US government is clear: despite the decentralised nature of the internet, web sites that run afoul of US policies are anything but invincible.
Comment: Which begs the question: how on Earth could WikiLeaks be doing what it is doing without the consensus (or outright support of) the most sophisticated cyber-intelligence network of a government bent on global domination?
While it remains unclear what ramifications a piece of legislation like Coica would have for free speech, political dissent and the flow of information online, the US government’s ability to confiscate domains could certainly spell trouble for sites like WikiLeaks in the future. Some engineers aren’t taking any chances: in response to the cyber Monday seizures, a group of online activists has announced plans to create a decentralised – and therefore, censorship-resistant – domain name system, based on the popular BitTorrent file transfer protocol.
The game of whack-a-mole, it seems, continues unabated. Source: http://www.sott.net/articles/show/218951-Operation-Trojan-Horse-US-government-will-use-WikiLeaks-revelations-to-shut-down-internet-domains
The united states of America (note lower case) was incorporated in 1868/71 by the Roman Catholic institute. The united states of America could not stay sovereign and trade with nations already within the Oleron Law system. This is why events were engineered to destroy the sovereignty of America and bring about the 14th Amendment making all State citizens now property of this corporation D.C. In truth D.C. controls no where on the mainland other than its small patch. Its upon sovereign land as is the Vatican City which controls it and The City of London. Its dominated by Georgetown 'military fortress' University and the Jesuit U.S Conference President. Washington D.C. sits on once Roman Catholic soil owned by Francis Pope and Daniel Carroll, the later's brother founded Georgetown University and was the first U.S Bishop. The land was once known in 1663 property records as Rome and is made up of a part of VIRGINia and a part of MARYland giving us the Queen of Witches, Queen Semarisis of Babylon the wife of Nimrod. The U.S. is totally under the thumb of The Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem's puppet the Knights of Malta who control the entire Temple Crown financial system have they've controlled the entire financial system since the destruction of the Knights Templar at the hands of the Pope. Two major haunts of the Knights Templar are visibly under the control of the Knights of Malta today. These are Aventine Hill in Rome which was once the Templars WHQ and the other is St John's Wood where now the Grand Priory of England is based and headed by Grand Prior, Fredrik Crichton-Stuart. The Knights of Malta control all other recognised orders and this is part covertly done via the likes of The Alliance of the Orders of St John. All the Knights of Malta are subordinate to the Cardinal and Grandmaster which at this moment in time is Matthew Festing, himself once from the Grand Priory of England. Canon Law controls everything and the Holy Office of the Inquisition continues to this very day all but in a commercial form. Oleron Law was perfected by the Roman Empire and based on Canon Law. Make sure you become aware quickly of the Universal Postal Union and its power within all of this. The U.P.U is based in Berne, Switzerland. The very location which was made neutral by the Congress of Vienna in 1814.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE THE GOOD OIL ON THIS PARTY??? PLEASE SHARE IF YOU DO... Category: Politics,Racism — posted by: The Beholder @ 6:26 am on December 5, 2010
I’m a few days late making this post but I figured it’s worth a comment or two.
Apparently the First Nations Party is set to be officially registered with the electoral commission as of next year, which means we will have the first indigenous political party contending for power in Australia.
Now I actually don’t have any problem with this at all – it’s a healthy addition to the democratic system. All groups, no matter who they are, how big or small they are or how good/bad they are should be allowed to have a crack and run for parliament. If there are certain interest groups willing to vote for them then so be it.
What concerns me however is the question of ethnic identity and how it’s going to factor into their constitution and mission as a party. If there are racially discriminate clauses in their constitution, will the Australian Human Rights Commission take action, as the UK’s Equality and Human Rights Commission did (and are still in the process of doing) against the British National Party – the First Nation Party of Britain? My guess is probably not.
It will be interesting to follow this party in the lead-up to the next federal election.
