Just days after Al Hallor, San Diego assistant port director and an officer with Customs and Border Protection, admitted that weapons of “mass effect” had entered a port somewhere in the San Diego area, Dr. Vahid Majidi, the FBI’s assistant director in charge of the FBI’s Weapons of Mass Destruction Directorate has stated that there is a 100% chance of a WMD attack in America.
Speaking to Newsmax, Dr. Majidi seemed eerily sure of an imminent attack in America.
“The notion of probability of a WMD attack being low or high is a moot point because we know the probability is 100 percent,” Majidi says. “We’ve seen this in the past, and we will see it in the future. There is going to be an attack using chemical, biological or radiological material.”
With documented evidence that Al Qaeda was created by western intelligence and that the FBI has literally given lone wolf terrorists multiple bombs, the idea that the assistant director in charge of the FBI’s Weapons of Mass Destruction Directorate is openly declaring a WMD attack will happen should raise alarms throughout America.
While Majidi did say terrorists would most likely employ chemical, biological, or radiological weapons rather than a nuclear device, the idea that a major nuke could go off in an American city is nothing new.
On February 9th, ABC 10News in San Diego interviewed Al Hallor about security issues at a San Diego Port. Hallor then went on to drop a bombshell, admitting that an unamed government agency had recovered a weapon of mass effect in the last year.
The rumors of missing nukes, illegally transported on a B-52 from Minot AFB to Barksdale AFB in Louisiana, have lent credibilty to the fact that rogue elements within our government and the Israeli government are planning some sort of nuclear “false flag.”
In early August, Gordon Duff writing for Veterans Today warned of a possible nuclear attack which involved Israel, Pakistan and Iran.
“The National Research Council, part of the National Academy of Science, heavy on politics and light on science, announced that America was no longer able to track nukes threatening our shores. Their report titled Nuclear Forensics: A Capability at Risk, released last week, outlines the details of a secret study requested by the Departments of Homeland Security, Defense and Energy, specifically the National Nuclear Security Administration.”
Essentially the report highlighted the fact that if a nuclear bomb was detonated we would be unable to tell who made it.
“Another piece of the puzzle involved a federal task force, Defense, Energy, FBI, descending on a warehouse in Greenfield, Indiana under the guise of a “records search.” This “Waco style” assault on a facility storing furniture for college dorm rooms was much more than it seemed. No case, criminal or civil, provided any underlying reason for the search,” wrote Duff.
Listen to our early August interview with Gordon Duff here.
Similar to the months leading up to 9/11, the public is being conditioned to accept the fact that a nuclear or biological weapon of mass destruction WILL go off in an American city in the very near future. This is absolutely unacceptable considering Homeland Security is installing a police state throughout America yet somehow cannot stop cave dwelling ninjas?
Of all people, Moyers should know the power of myths in human society, and that a myth is not the truth. “Myths are public dreams,” said Joseph Campbell. In America, where tricksters and thieves have total government power in their hands, and rule over the public mind with propaganda and other techniques of collective brainwashing, the only truth that is allowed to be expressed is their truth. What they say is real becomes reality itself; what they dream behind closed doors becomes lived experience. They did 9/11, and they’re still free almost ten years later because journalists have not fully questioned the events of that day. Since 9/11 the American people, and people across the planet, have lived not in a public dream but in a public nightmare. And we have the tricksters and traitors in Washington to thank.
It takes patience, and a “readiness to own thyself mistaken,” as Thomas Carlyle said, to dig through the facts and evidence before arriving at the truth of what really happened on September 11, 2001. I thought Moyers would be more open-minded and sympathetic, but he’s made an ignorant judgment about the movement for 9/11 truth and accountability. I feel let down because I admired Moyers. It turns out most journalists can’t handle the truth about 9/11. Oh well. I have new heroes now: Paul Craig Roberts, William Cooper, David Ray Griffin, Alex Jones, Richard Gage, Bob McIlvaine, the list is endless. I hope Moyers rejoins the list in the future.
Although I understand that people deny a painful truth because it undermines their core beliefs about the world, and damages their self-esteem, I’m still surprised that intelligent and genuinely independent-minded individuals can’t accept the fact that the Bush administration completely lied about 9/11. Our supposedly best journalists and reporters, who constantly talk about democracy, free speech, and the need to resist power, and who endlessly quote Orwell, are not only nowhere to be found when it comes to speaking the truth about 9/11, but they arrogantly mock the individuals who are simply asking for a new investigation.
Like other prominent journalists and reporters, Chris Hedges and Robert Parry among them, former PBS broadcaster Bill Moyers is shockingly dismissive of the evidence that undercuts the official story about 9/11 which has been painstakingly gathered by 9/11 truth activists, professional architects and engineers, citizen journalists, and regular individuals.
In a speech given at a convention held by History Makers in New York on January 27, 2011, Moyers said that the 9/11 truth movement is not based on the truth but disinformation and conspiracy theories. He ignorantly refers to 9/11 truth activists as “truthers.” Here is an excerpt from the speech:
Disinformation is not unique to the right, of course. Like other journalists, I have been the object of malevolent assaults from the “9/11 truthers” for not reporting their airtight case proving that the Bush administration conspired to bring about the attacks on the World Trade Center. How did they discover this conspiracy? As the independent journalist Robert Parry has written, “the truthers” threw out all the evidence of al-Qaeda’s involvement, from contemporaneous calls from hijack victims on the planes to confessions from al-Qaeda leaders both in and out of captivity that they had indeed done it. Then, recycling some of the right’s sophistry techniques, such as using long lists of supposed evidence to overcome the lack of any real evidence, the “truthers” cherry-picked a few supposed “anomalies” to build an “inside-job” story line. Fortunately, this Big Lie never took hold in the public mind. These truthers on the left, if that is where GPS can find them on the political map, are outgunned, outmatched and outshouted by the media apparatus on the right that pounds the public like drone missiles loaded with conspiracy theories and disinformation and accompanied by armadas of outright lies.
George Orwell had warned six decades ago that the corrosion of language goes hand in hand with the corruption of democracy. If he were around today, he would remind us that “like the rattling of a stick inside a swill bucket,” this kind of propaganda engenders a “protective stupidity” almost impossible for facts to penetrate.
But you, my colleagues, can’t give up. If you do, there’s no chance any public memory of everyday truths - the tangible, touchable, palpable realities so vital to democracy - will survive. We would be left to the mercy of the agitated amnesiacs who “make” their own reality, as one of them boasted at the time America invaded Iraq, in order to maintain their hold on the public mind and the levers of power. You will remember that in Orwell’s novel “1984,” Big Brother banishes history to the memory hole, where inconvenient facts simply disappear. Control of the present rests on obliteration of the past. The figure of O’Brien, who is the personification of Big Brother, says to the protagonist, Winston Smith: “We shall squeeze you empty and then we shall fill you with ourselves.” And they do. The bureaucrats in the Ministry of Truth destroy the records of the past and publish new versions. These in turn are superseded by yet more revisions. Why? Because people without memory are at the mercy of the powers that be; there is nothing against which to measure what they are told today. History is obliterated.
By quoting Orwell, you would think that Moyers would understand that using the labels “conspiracy theories” and “9/11 truthers” to bat away and delegitimize other human beings represents “the corrosion of language” that Orwell warned about. How did the label “conspiracy theory” enter the popular lexicon in the first place, anyway? It surely benefits the war criminals in power in Washington when journalists like Moyers and Parry use the label “conspiracy theorist” to put down activists and stand beside the official lie that Al-Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden carried out the 9/11 attacks. It seems like Moyers, Parry, and other journalists are putting themselves inside a bubble of “protective stupidity,” making it “almost impossible for facts to penetrate.”
Has Moyers watched the collapse of Building 7? Has he read the books on 9/11 by David Ray Griffin? Has he interviewed Richard Gage of Architects And Engineers For 9/11 Truth? What kind of research has he done on the subject? Or is he just talking out of his ass?
If Orwell were alive today, he would not mock 9/11 truth, but research all the evidence, and then let it all hang out.
Saman “Truth Excavator” Mohammadi is a blogger and a full-time university student, currently living in Toronto, Canada. His blog is The Excavator - http://disquietreservations.blogspot.com
It is now obvious Wikileaks is an intelligence operation and its frontman Julian Assange is a useful idiot.
The corporate media today is chock full of stories about the latest round of supposed diplomatic documents purloined by a low level Army intelligence analyst. According to the documents, the CIA asset al-Qaeda has managed to acquire “workable and efficient” biological and chemical weapons and the West stands on the brink of a “nuclear 9/11.” It is said the documents detail a 2009 NATO meeting where security chiefs briefed member states that al-CIA-duh was readying “dirty radioactive IEDs” to be used against British troops in Afghanistan.
Dirty bombs were debunked years ago and it is surprising the folks behind the fake diplomatic cables are attempting to pawn this fantasy off on us again as they did in 2002 when former Chicago gangbanger Jose Padilla was arrested and paraded in the corporate media as the face of al-Qaeda in America.
Once again, Pakistan figures prominently in this scary fairy tale. “Senior British defense officials have raised ‘deep concerns’ that a rogue scientist in the Pakistani nuclear program ‘could gradually smuggle enough material out to make a weapon,” according to a document detailing official talks in London in February 2009,” the Daily Telegraph reported yesterday.
Left out of the equation is the fact Pakistan would not have nuclear weapons if not for the United States.
Back in 1979, as the CIA was in the process of cobbling together the Afghan Mujahideen that would later become al-Qaeda, the globalist and Rockefeller minion Zbigniew Brzezinski forged a new policy toward the formerly pariah Islamic state. Brzezinski said “that our security policy toward Pakistan cannot be dictated by our nonproliferation policy.” Reagan also didn’t see a problem. “I just don’t think it’s any of our business,” he remarked when quizzed about Pakistan’s nuclear ambitions.
Moreover, the supposed smuggling of nuclear material out of Pakistan would face difficulty due to the fact the country’s nukes are locked down.
“Over the past six years, the Bush administration has spent almost $100 million on a highly classified program to help Gen. Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan’s president, secure his country’s nuclear weapons, according to current and former senior administration officials,” the New York Times reported on November 17, 2007. “The secret program was designed by the Energy Department and the State Department, and it drew heavily from the effort over the past decade to secure nuclear weapons, stockpiles and materials in Russia and other former Soviet states. Much of the money for Pakistan was spent on physical security, like fencing and surveillance systems, and equipment for tracking nuclear material if it left secure areas.”
In addition to dirty bombs, terrorists are planning to blow up commercial airliners with teddy bears, according to the Wikileaks documents. “Airport security staff are being urged to examine ‘children’s articles’ after US intelligence concluded that terrorists were plotting to fill them with explosive chemicals,” reports the Daily Telegraph.
Terrorists are attempting to manufacture nitrocellulose, a chemical which can become highly explosive if tightly packed. Details of how to prepare the chemical, which cannot be detected by airport X-ray machines, have been found in al-Qaeda training manuals.
You may remember the original al-Qaeda training manual. It was located in Manchester, England, and brought to our attention with much absurd fanfare. It was later revealed that the document was penned in the 1980s around the same time the CIA and Pakistan’s ISI were collaborating in Afghanistan, well before the CIA decided to create al-Qaeda from a database of Mujahideen warriors.
In short, more sexual molestation and naked body porno scanners will be required at airports if we are going to stop al-CIA-duh as it continues to plan sensationalistic terror events that either never occur or are executed by mentally impaired operatives and dim-witted patsies.
The Wikileaks documents are also designed to rekindle the hysteria manufactured by the government after September 11, 2001. According to the documents, a group of Qataris conducted surveillance on the targets of 9/11 and provided support for the phantom hijackers who were trained at U.S. military bases. “Details of the unknown 9/11 alleged plotters has never previously been disclosed,” reports the Daily Telegraph.
Here is a detail that has been previously disclosed (although assiduously ignored by the corporate media) – Osama bin Laden and the Taliban shared “intimate relations” with the Pentagon and U.S. intelligence right up until the morning of September 11, 2001, according to the most gagged woman in America, former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds.
The CIA groomed manufactured enemies from China to Chechnya, Albania, and Kosovo, Edmonds revealed, but you won’t find that in Assange’s mass of documents.
For all its dutiful work in the service of the globalist empire, Wikileaks has been nominated for the 2011 Nobel Peace Prize by Norwegian politician Snorre Valen, who said the shady outfit played an instrumental role in freedom of speech.
“WikiLeaks is one of this century’s most important contributors to freedom of speech and transparency,” the NTB news agency quoted Valen as saying today.
It also played a role in perpetuating cover stories used by government as pretexts to further erode our liberties and engage in wanton mass murder around the world.
A former Princeton international law professor has been condemned by the UN Secretary General and the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations for alluding to “an apparent cover-up” of the events of September 11th, 2001.
On January 11, 2011, UN Special Envoy to Palestine Richard Falk posted on his personal blog an article entitled “Interrogating the Arizona Killings from a Safe Distance.”[1]
Dr. Falk made a tangential point in his blog-post that governments too often abuse their authority by treating “awkward knowledge as a matter of state secrets”.
To illustrate the point, he referred to gaps and contradictions in the official account of the 9/11 attacks, which have been documented in the scholarly works of Dr. David Ray Griffin, a professor emeritus of philosophy of religion and theology.
“What seems most disturbing about the 9/11 controversy is the widespread aversion by government and media to the evidence that suggests, at the very least, the need for an independent investigation that proceeds with no holds barred,” wrote Falk.
On January 20th, executive director Hillel Neuer of UN Watch, a European NGO, called upon UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to condemn the remarks made by Falk, and to fire him, claiming that Falk had “endorsed the conspiracy theory that the 9/11 terrorist attacks were orchestrated by the U.S. government and not Al Qaeda terrorists.” [2]
On January 24th, in a reply to Hillel Neuer, Vijay Nambiar, Ban Ki-moon’s Chief of Staff, responded that the Secretary-General “condemns these remarks. He has repeatedly stated his view that any such suggestion is preposterous — and an affront to the memory of the more than 3,000 people who died in the attack.”[3]
The US Ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, called for Falk’s removal, stating that “Mr. Falk’s comments are despicable and deeply offensive, and I condemn them in the strongest terms.” [4]
Surely, in light of what Falk actually said, these indignant cries on behalf of the victims seem more than a little apoplectic.
If Falk’s suggestions were so “preposterous” and “offensive”, they might have been dismissed as the ravings of a madman.
So why did officials bring out their cannons to shoot at a sparrow?
Well, turning to the work of Professor Griffin we find that there were 115 omissions and distortions in the 9/11 Commission Report, though Falk did not, in his brief remarks, provide details. [5]
A search of the Internet reveals 12 professional organizations calling for a new investigation, including Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth (with over 1,400 professional members), Firefighters for 9/11 Truth, Intelligence Officers for 9/11 Truth, Lawyers for 9/11 Truth, Medical Professionals for 9/11 Truth, Pilots for 9/11 Truth, Political Leaders for 9/11 Truth, Military Officers for 9/11 Truth, and Scientists for 9/11 Truth.
In August, 2005, the New York Times printed the oral testimonies of 118 firefighters and emergency workers who reported stunning, graphic evidence of enormous explosions, including mysterious blasts in the deep sub-basements of the buildings long before the towers fell.[6]
More recently, a nine-author peer-reviewed study, which showed that the World Trade Center dust appeared to contain residue of explosive material (nanothermite), made headlines for the first week of February 2010 in major Danish newspapers. [7]
This news never reached the North American media.
A December 2010 poll by the prestigious Emnid Institute showed that 89.5% of Germans doubt the US official story about the September 11th attacks.[8]
The 9/11 commissioners themselves, in a 2008 op-ed piece to the New York Times, bemoaned the withholding of witness evidence to the 9/11 Commission by the CIA: “What we do know is that government officials decided not to inform a lawfully constituted body, created by Congress and the president, to investigate one the greatest tragedies to confront this country. We call that obstruction.” [9]
Perhaps this sparrow is worth a cannon or two.
In other words, was Falk attacked so strongly to try to make people fear suggesting in public even the possibility that the official story is problematic?
Does anyone remember the “cakewalk war” that would last six weeks, cost $50-$60 billion, and be paid for out of Iraqi oil revenues?
Does anyone remember that White House economist Lawrence Lindsey was fired by Dubya because Lindsey estimated that the Iraq war could cost as much as $200 billion?
Lindsey was fired for over-estimating the cost of a war that, according to Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes, has cost 15 times more than Lindsey estimated. And the US still has 50,000 troops in Iraq.
Does anyone remember that just prior to the US invasion of Iraq, the US government declared victory over the Taliban in Afghanistan?
Does anyone remember that the reason Dubya gave for invading Iraq was Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction, weapons that the US government knew did not exist?
Are Americans aware that the same neoconservatives who made these fantastic mistakes, or told these fabulous lies, are still in control of the government in Washington?
The “war on terror” is now in its tenth year. What is it really all about?
The bottom line answer is that the “war on terror” is about creating real terrorists. The US government desperately needs real terrorists in order to justify its expansion of its wars against Muslim countries and to keep the American people sufficiently fearful that they continue to accept the police state that provides “security from terrorists,” but not from the government that has discarded civil liberties.
The US government creates terrorists by invading Muslim countries, wrecking infrastructure and killing vast numbers of civilians. The US also creates terrorists by installing puppet governments to rule over Muslims and by using the puppet governments to murder and persecute citizens as is occurring on a vast scale in Pakistan today.
Neoconservatives used 9/11 to launch their plan for US world hegemony. Their plan fit with the interests of America’s ruling oligarchies. Wars are good for the profits of the military/security complex, about which President Eisenhower warned us in vain a half century ago. American hegemony is good for the oil industry’s control over resources
The reaction of establishment politicians and their corporate media mouthpieces to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s comments about 9/11 is akin to that of a guilty child caught with his hand in the cookie jar and chocolate smeared all over his face.
The move to inflate the situation by creating a media circus will ultimately backfire as more people discover that, unfortunately, the Iranian President’s comments, although cloaked in an ever present anti-Israel sentiment, are accurate.
Ahmadinejad stated simply that millions of people believe there is evidence to suggest the 9/11 attacks were an inside job of some kind – a statement of fact, no matter how repugnant he who delivers it may be.
US President Barack Obama has declared he is “outraged and offended” by the comments, later giving an interview to the BBC’s Persian service, in which he told the Iranian people that the comments were “offensive and hateful”.
As ever, the truth of the matter has been distorted beyond recognition as a minority of UN delegates walking out on Ahmadinejad’s speech yesterday was transformed overnight into a full scale revolt by the corporate media.
The EU, we are told, was so disgusted with Ahmadinejad’s comments that “all representatives of the 27 nations of the EU walked out”.
However, in 2008 when the European parliament hosted a debate on the events of 9/11, the evidence that contradicts the official explanation and the reasons why an independent investigation should be carried out, there was no outcry whatsoever.
When European member of parliament Giulietto Chiesa and former German defence minister Andreas von Bulow led the debate on 9/11 inconsistencies, no one walked out and the newspapers remained devoid of front page headlines, because there was no opportunity to smear and discredit the issue based on the characters of those raising it.
Similarly, when prominent Japanese politician Yukihisa Fujita held debates and spoke on questions surrounding 9/11, prompting Parliamentarians of various countries to consider asking the UN to investigate, no establishment politicians denounced him and the newspapers remained devoid of front page headlines.
When the former President of Italy, Francesco Cossiga, stated that in his view 9/11 was a vast intelligence operation overseen by the U.S. intelligence apparatus, the newspapers remained devoid of front page headlines.
When several members of the officially appointed 9/11 Commission stated that the intelligence
Leading international think tank for military affairs says the threat from al-Qaeda and the Taliban has been over exaggerated. CIA chief Leon Panetta admitted recently that there were no more than 50 members of al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. Obama has authorized 120,000 American soldiers to fight them.
THE London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), is the world’s leading think tank for military affairs. It represents the top echelon of defence experts, retired officers and senior military men, spanning the globe from the United States and Britain to China, Russia and India.I’ve been an IISS member for over 20 years. IISS’s reports are always authoritative but usually cautious and diplomatic, sometimes dull. However, two weeks ago the IISS issued an explosive report on Afghanistan that is shaking Washington and its Nato allies.
The report, presided over by the former deputy director of Britain’s foreign intelligence agency, MI-6, says the threat from al-Qaeda and Taliban has been “exaggerated” by the western powers. The US-led mission in Afghanistan has “ballooned” out of all proportion from its original aim of disrupting and defeating al-Qaeda. The US-led war in Afghanistan, says IISS, using uncharacteristically blunt language, is “a long-drawn-out disaster”.
Just recently, CIA chief Leon Panetta admitted there were no more than 50 members of Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Yet US President Barack Obama has tripled the number of US soldiers there to 120,000 to fight Al Qaeda.
The IISS report goes on to acknowledge the presence of western troops in Afghanistan is actually fuelling national resistance. I saw the same phenomena during the 1980’s Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.
Interestingly, the portion of the report overseen by the former MI-6 Secret Intelligence Service deputy chief, Nigel Inskster, finds little Al Qaeda threat elsewhere, notably in Somalia and Yemen. Yet Washington is beefing up its attacks on both turbulent nations.
Abandoning its usual discretion, IISS said it was issuing these warnings because the deepening war in Afghanistan was threatening the west’s security interests by distracting its leaders from the world financial crisis and Iran, and burning through scarce funds needed elsewhere.
The IISS’s findings are a direct challenge to Obama, Britain’s new prime minister, David Cameron, and other US allies with troops in Afghanistan. This report undermines their rational used to sustain the increasingly unpopular conflict. It will certainly convince sceptics that the real reason for occupation of Afghanistan has to do with oil, excluding China from the region, and keeping watch on nuclear-armed Pakistan.
The report also goes on to propose an exit strategy from the Afghan War. Western occupation troops, IISS proposes, should be sharply reduced and confined to Kabul and northern Afghanistan, which is mostly ethnic Tajik and Uzbek.
Southern Afghanistan – Taliban country – should be vacated by Western forces and left alone. Taliban would be allowed to govern its own half of the nation until some sort of loose, decentralised federal system can be implemented. This was, in fact, pretty much the way Afghanistan operated before the 1979 Soviet invasion.
Meanwhile, the war in Afghanistan is turning against the increasingly wobbly western occupation forces. The US-installed Afghan leader, Hamid Karzai, openly prepares for direct peace talks with Taliban and its allies – in spite of intense opposition from the US, Britain and Canada.
Pro-government Afghan forces are increasingly demoralised. Only the Tajik and Uzbek militias, and Afghan Communist Party, both supported by India, Russia and Iran, want to keep fighting the Pashtun Taliban.
Taliban leader Mullah Omar last week proclaimed the western occupiers were rapidly losing the war. He may well be correct. Nothing is going right for the US-backed Kabul regime or its western defenders. Even the much-ballyhooed US offensive at Marjah, designed to smash Taliban resistance, was an embarrassing fiasco. Civilian casualties from US bombing continue to mount.
Europeans are fed up with the Afghan war. Polls report 60% of Americans think the war not worth fighting.
The IISS bombshell comes on the heels of the most dramatic part of the British Chilcot Inquiry into the origins of the invasion of Iraq. Baroness Manningham-Buller the former head of Britain’s domestic security service, MI-5, testified that the Iraq War was generated by a farrago of lies and faked evidence from the Blair government. What we call “terrorism” is largely caused by the western invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, she testified.
The truth about Iraq and Afghanistan is finally emerging.
Afghanistan may again prove to be “the graveyard of empires”.
Eric S. Margolis is a contributing editor to the Toronto Sun chain of newspapers, writing mainly about the Middle East and South Asia. Comments: letters@thesundaily.com
Those who have studied history know that nothing invigorates and empowers an authoritarian regime more than a spectacular act of violence, some sudden and senseless loss of life that allows the autocrat to stand on the smoking rubble and identify himself as the hero. It is at moments like this that the public—still in shock from the horror of the tragedy that has just unfolded before them—can be led into the most ruthless despotism: despotism that now bears the mantle of “security.”
Acts of terror and violence never benefit the average man or woman. They only ever benefit those in positions of power.
This is why Nero fiddled while Rome burned: it gave him a chance to throw the Christians to the lions and rebuild the capital of the Roman Empire in his own image.
This is why Hearst and the warmongers of the emerging American Empire were delighted by the destruction of the U.S.S. Maine in Havana Harbor: it gave them the excuse they needed in order to rouse the public into supporting the Spanish-American War.
This is why Israel attacked the U.S.S. Liberty in 1967 during the Six Day War, strafing and torpedoing it relentlessly for hours in a vain attempt to send it to the bottom: the Israelis believed that the loss of the Liberty could be blamed on Egypt and draw the Americans into war.
This is why there are hundreds of documented examples of governments staging attacks in order to blame them on their political enemies. In every civilization, in every culture, in every historical period, authoritarians have known that spectacular acts of violence help to further consolidate their own power and control. And sadly, throughout history there have been all too many willing to allow attacks to occur, to pretend that attacks have occurred or even to attack their own population in order to further their political agenda.
To think that such staged provocations and false flag attacks no longer occur would be as unrealistic as believing that human nature itself has changed, that powerful people no longer seek to increase their power, that influence is never used for deceit or manipulation, that lies are no longer told to satisfy greed or slake the thirst for control. It is to believe that our society is immuned from those things that we have seen in every other society in every other era. In short, it is a dangerous delusion.
The people are once again learning the power of this delusion. They are learning the extent to which they have been lied to. They are once again studying their history.
The Russians are learning how the FSB was caught planting bombs in Moscow in the 1990s during a terror scare that swept Putin into power and stirred the public into supporting the Second Chechen War. They are learning how their autocratic ex-President came to power campaigning on the graves of those his old FSB cronies had killed.
The Israelis are learning how Mossad has been caught time and again posing as the very Muslim terrorists they claim to be opposing. They are learning how Israel uses the specter of terror to further extend their (more…)
Special thanx to WEARECHANGELA for their protest footage and huge banner signs they used. what people do not know is killing people and causing too much suffering across the world. Glenn beck you have blood on your hands
“The National Research Council, part of the National Academy of Science, heavy on politics and light on science, announced that America was no longer able to track nukes threatening our shores. Their report titled Nuclear Forensics: A Capability at Risk, released last week, outlines the details of a secret study requested by the Departments of Homeland Security, Defense and Energy, specifically the National Nuclear Security Administration.” 
Comments Off
The reaction of establishment politicians and their corporate media mouthpieces to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s comments about 9/11 is akin to that of a guilty child caught with his hand in the cookie jar and chocolate smeared all over his face.