Showing posts with label NATO. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 15, 2013

Seal Team 6. Assassination by a Corrupt Government?

THIS IS A DISCLAIMER REGARDING THE FOLLOWING. I HAVE HAD A GUT FEELING ABOUT THIS ALL ALONG BECAUSE OUR GOVERNMENT HAS BECOME SO CORRUPT. I DON'T NECESSARILY DOUBT THAT SEAL TEAM SIX WERE TAKEN OUT BY OUR OWN GOVERNMENT TO SILENCE THEM. HOWEVER, I HAVE DONE MY RESEARCH ON THE INTERNET AND I AM NOT A PERSONAL WITNESS OF THE EVENTS. YOU WILL NEED TO DECIDE FOR YOURSELF.
........................................................

Families of Navy SEALs killed in 2011 attack say government is to blame

Published May 10, 2013

FoxNews.com

File: A US Army CH-47D Chinook helicopter in flight. (AP)

The families of Navy SEAL Team 6 members killed in a disastrous August 2011 helicopter crash in Afghanistan blamed the government for the tragedy, during an emotional press conference in Washington Thursday.

The family members, speaking at the National Press Club, tried to reopen the book on the crash, in which 30 Americans were killed, most of them belonging to the same unit as those who carried out the raid on Usama bin Laden earlier that year. The helicopter was shot down by insurgents.

During the event organized by a group called Freedom Watch, family members and former military personnel claimed President Obama turned the SEALs group into a Taliban target after the administration revealed they had conducted the bin Laden raid.

Doug Hamburger, whose son Patrick was killed, called the incident an “ambush” that could have been prevented.

“We’re very concerned that the administration had disclosed that the Navy SEALs had carried out a successful attack on bin Laden’s compound resulting in his death. And you know, never before in the history of our county (had) a sitting president released that type of information to the public, especially when he was talking about special forces. Their names and their missions had never been revealed before. And we really feel that this put our guys in an unnecessary risk,” Hamburger said.

Many military experts at the time, including some of Obama’s top military advisers, had questioned the White House’s public praise of SEAL Team 6 and said it put members in danger.

Three months after bin Laden’s death, members of the SEAL Team 6 force -- though apparently not the same ones who carried out the bin Laden raid -- were on board the CH-47 Chinook transport helicopter, along with its Army National Guard aircrew, several support personnel and seven Afghan commandos. In all, 38 people died that night after the chopper was shot down by a Taliban-owned rocket-propelled grenade –or RPG – over the Wardak Province on Aug. 6, 2011.

Uploaded on Aug 14, 2011

Song and video by Randell Beck - former Navy Officer (SWO). Dedicated to the members of ST-6 who lost their lives Aug 6, 2011, under questionable circumstances, and the men of the Navy, Army, and Marines that were with them. May they be received with honor in the long home of their fathers.

Uploaded on Aug 9, 2011

Whistleblower 'Colonel Sixx'(Derek Fagan-McHenry) who is now 'DEAD' had some interesting insider information to share about the Chinook Helicopter
Crash in Afghanistan. http://casescorner.wordpress.com/cate...(Whistleblower Colenol Sixx Website) http://colonel6.com/

30 men were said to have been killed. 22 said to be Navy SEALS commandos from SEAL Team Six . He also has info about the Alleged Osama Bin Laden Assassination ordered by USA Marxist President Barack Husein Obama. AKA Barry Soetoro.

This is reportedly the largest one day loss of troops in the 10 year war in Afghanistan and it just happens to be Seal Team 6. So now we are to buy that the men who took out OBL died in a helicopter crash months after pulling off the raid. Our inside sources told us months ago that all the Seals on the helicopter that crashed in the so called OBL raid died, yet the Obama admin says none were killed.

Witnesses on the ground in Pakistan told national News outlets that the Seals went in to the compound then came out got in a stealth craft and it exploded. The video with the witnesses is posted on Infowars.com in our news report titled "Seal Team 6 Deaths Exposed". Now the globalists may have killed off the rest of the Seal team that made it out in the other stealth helicopter from the OBL raid to tie up loose ends. Bottom line the official bin Laden raid story is a proven fraud so it is no wonder that this story dose not add up.

Uploaded on Aug 7, 2011

Whistleblower 'Colonel Sixx'(Derek Fagan-McHenry) is now DEAD! Murdered? This is reportedly the largest one day loss of troops in the 10 year war in
Afghanistan http://casescorner.wordpress.com/cate...(Whistleblower Colenol Sixx Website) http://colonel6.com/ and it just happens to be Seal Team 6. So now we are to buy that the men who took out OBL died in a helicopter crash months after pulling off the raid. Our inside sources told us months ago that all the Seals on the helicopter that crashed in the so called OBL raid died, yet the Obama admin says none were killed.

Witnesses on the ground in Pakistan told national News outlets that the Seals went in to the compound then came out got in a stealth craft and it exploded. The video with the witnesses is posted on Infowars.com in our news report titled "Seal Team 6 Deaths Exposed". Now the globalists may have killed off the rest of the Seal team that made it out in the other stealth helicopter from the OBL raid to tie up loose ends. Bottom line the official bin Laden raid story is a proven fraud so it is no wonder that this story dose not add up.

Uploaded on Aug 6, 2011

The team was thought to include 22 SEALs, three Air Force air controllers, seven Afghan Army troops, a dog and his handler, and a civilian interpreter, plus the helicopter crew.

The sources thought this was the largest single loss of life ever for SEAL Team Six, known as the Naval Special Warfare Development Group.

CNN

Saturday, December 8, 2012

Chemical Weapons In Syria. Will They Be Used By The Assad Regime Or The Rebels?

Syria chemical weapons scare: Is Assad threatening to use them, or lose them?

A report suggests that Syria has ramped up activity at chemical-weapons sites. But President Bashar al-Assad might simply be sending a message to the international community.

By Howard LaFranchi, Staff writer / December 6, 2012

NATO foreign ministers meet at the alliance's headquarters in Brussels Tuesday, when they agreed to send Patriot missiles to beef up Turkey's air defenses and calm Turkey's fears that it could come under missile attack, possibly with chemical weapons, from Syria.

Yves Herman/Reuters

In Pictures: Reaching a critical juncture in Syria

Syria’s stockpile of chemical weapons stems in part from worries that an increasingly desperate President Bashar al-Assad might use them against advancing rebel forces in the country’s 21-month-old civil war.
read more at http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Foreign-Policy/2012/1206/Syria-chemical-weapons-scare-Is-Assad-threatening-to-use-them-or-lose-them-video

Syria 'planning chemical weapons'

Demonstrators pose with Syrian opposition flags at the site of buildings badly damaged by fire from a Syrian air force fighter jet. Photograph: Kenan Al-Derani/Shaam News/Reuters

British foreign secretary William Hague said today he had seen “some evidence” that Syria is preparing to use chemical weapons against rebels.

Mr Hague declined to give details of the intelligence, but again warned that Bashar Assad’s regime would face action if they were deployed.

American satellites and other tools have reportedly detected increased activity at several chemical weapons depots in Syria.

At least one military base is also said to have been ordered to begin combining components of Sarin nerve gas to make it ready to use.

The Syrian regime has denied any plans to use chemical weapons against it own people.

Speaking to the BBC at a security conference in the Gulf this morning, Mr Hague was asked whether he had seen proof that Syria was preparing such weapons.

“We have seen some evidence of that,” he said. “We and the US, as I said in parliament this week, have seen some evidence of that and that is why we have issued strong warnings about it. We have done so directly to the Syrian regime.”

Pressed on what kind of evidence he had seen, Mr Hague replied: “We absolutely cannot be specific about that because clearly those are intelligence sources that these things come from. But we have seen enough evidence to know that they need a warning and they have received that warning.”

Amid speculation that the regime could be targeted with airstrikes, Mr Hague said the use of chemical weapons would be a “major change in situation”.

source: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2012/1208/breaking13.html

Syria's Sarin, Chemical Weapons: FAQ

By Daniel J. DeNoon, Reviewed by Louise Chang, MD

WebMD Medical News

Dec. 6, 2012 —

Syria's military is reported to be prepared to use sarin, a potent nerve gas, posing an obvious threat to Syrian civilians -- and to the rest of the world.

What is sarin? What other chemical weapons are in Syria's arsenal? Might the weapons fall into the wrong hands? See below for answers to these and other questions posed by this troubling development.

What Is Sarin?

Sarin, also known as GB, is a man-made nerve gas not found in nature. It's one of the most deadly and fastest-acting chemical weapons known to man.

Developed by a German chemist in 1938, sarin was too dangerous for its intended use as a pesticide. The Nazis developed sarin into a chemical weapon, but never used it.

Iraq is thought to have deployed sarin weapons during the Iran-Iraq war. Iraq also used sarin in an attack on its own Kurdish population. It was used in the subways of Japan in a domestic terrorist attack by an apocalyptic cult.

How Does Sarin Harm People?

Sarin is a close relative of organophosphate bug-killers, but is far more powerful. On humans, it has much the same effect as these pesticides have on bugs.

According to the CDC, sarin blocks the chemical "off switch" for glands and muscles. Muscles quickly fail, and a person who gets a lethal dose stops being able to breathe.

Chemical weapons typically use aerosolized sarin, which has no odor or color. People exposed to the vapor, or who get a drop or two of liquid sarin on their skin, die within minutes to 18 hours. Sarin could also be used to poison water or food.

Sarin evaporates quickly. Clothing contaminated with sarin gives off deadly fumes for about 30 minutes, posing a risk to rescue workers and medical personnel.

Why Worry About Syria's Sarin?

Leonard Spector, deputy director of the nonprofit James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies, in 2011 reported that the U.S. government believes Syria has a large stockpile of chemical agents. These agents range from mustard gas -- infamously used during World War I trench warfare -- to sarin and an even more deadly nerve gas called VX.

Sarin is too corrosive and too dangerous to store in its active form. Weapons usually mix the final two sarin ingredients just before or during firing. News reports suggest the Syrian military already has begun mixing active sarin bombs to be loaded onto warplanes.

Use of such weapons would be an awful abuse of human rights. But that's not the only threat.

Spector says Syria has four or five chemical weapons plants near Damascus, Hama, Latakia, and Aleppo. There's already heavy fighting in those areas. There's a risk that these weapons might fall into the hands of criminals or terrorist organizations, or that Syria might ship them to nations more likely to use them than the Syrians had been.

Journalist Elaine M. Grossman, writing for Global Security Newswire, says a highly placed defense expert told her that the U.S. government has "essentially about 10 plans now in the works" for dealing with various possible scenarios. Those plans, she notes, are highly classified.

What Is VX?

VX, invented by a British chemist in the early 1950s, is a nerve gas even more deadly than sarin. Like sarin, it is tasteless and odorless. Unlike sarin, it is thick and oily. It evaporates only as quickly as motor oil and thus can remain in the environment for months.

What Are the Symptoms of Sarin and VX Poisoning?

The first signs of poisoning with sarin or VX are a runny nose and pinpoint pupils. Those who do not get an immediately lethal dose will have trouble breathing, fluid in the lungs, sweating, and muscle twitching.

There are nervous system effects, such as fatigue, irritability, nervousness, and impaired memory. Survivors may have these symptoms six weeks after recovery from other symptoms.

What Is the Treatment for Sarin and VX Poisoning?

There are antidotes for nerve gas poisoning with sarin or VX: atropine and pralidoxime chloride. These antidotes must be injected very soon after poisoning occurs.

People exposed to sarin or VX can protect themselves by quickly moving to an area where there is fresh air. Both sarin and VX are heavier than air and settle in low-lying areas. So if outdoors, a person should move immediately to the highest ground possible. If sarin is released within a building, leave the building immediately.

After any sarin or VX exposure, it's important to remove all clothing and wash all skin areas with soap and water. Clothing that must be pulled over the head should be cut off. All clothing should be double bagged in plastic bags and left for professional removal.

Treat eye exposure -- symptoms are burning or blurred vision -- by flushing with fresh water for 10 to 15 minutes.

If sarin or VX is swallowed, do not induce vomiting, and do not give fluids to drink.

In all cases of exposure to nerve gas, seek immediate emergency medical care.

SOURCES: CDC web site: "Facts About Sarin," "Facts About VX."Global Security Newswire: "U.S. Anxiously Shaping Contingency Options for Syrian Chemical Arsenal."Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI) web site.New Yorker web site: "The Syrian Sarin Threat."Spector, L. Foreign Policy, Aug. 23, 2011.Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATDSR) web site, "Nerve Agents."CNN web site: "Syria Mixing Chemical Warfare Agents, U.S. Official."

source: http://www.ktvu.com/news/lifestyles/health/syrias-sarin-chemical-weapons-faq/nTQPx/

Syria warns rebels may use chemical weapons

Sunday, December 09, 2012

DAMASCUS: Syria warned on Saturday that rebels could use chemical weapons in their fight against President Bashar al-Assad’s forces, and insisted that the regime will never unleash such arms on its own people.

British Foreign Secretary William Hague, however, said there was evidence the Damascus government could actually employ chemical weapons stocks in the conflict which a rights group says has killed at least 42,000 people in nearly 21 months. “Terrorist groups may resort to using chemical weapons against the Syrian people... after having gained control of a toxic chlorine factory” east of Aleppo, the foreign ministry said, using the government term for rebel groups.

It added that Damascus would never use such weapons against its own people. The ministry was believed to be referring to the Syrian-Saudi Chemicals Company (SYSACCO) factory near Safira, which was taken over earlier this week by militants from the jihadist Al-Nusra Front. Syria “is defending its people against terrorism, which is supported by known countries, with the United States at the forefront,” the ministry said.

Global concerns over Syria’s chemical weapons stockpiles grew after US officials this week privately said the regime had begun mixing precursor chemicals that could be used for the lethal nerve agent sarin. Some media reports said that the substance had been loaded into bombs for warplanes.

Hague said on Saturday there was evidence Syrian government forces could use chemical weapons against the insurgency.

“We are extremely concerned about the stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and we are also concerned about evidence during the last couple of weeks that the regime could use them,” he told reporters in Manama on the sidelines of a security conference.

Hague said Britain had joined the United States in delivering a strong message to Assad’s government and that the global community had “contingency plans concerning chemical weapons but will not disclose them.” He cited several “dangerous scenarios,” including their “use by the regime” or falling into the hands “of other people.”

Washington has said the use of chemical weapons would be a red line but that it fears rebel battlefield advances could prompt the regime to use them, or that stocks could fall into the hands of groups hostile to the US and its allies.

UN chief Ban Ki-moon said on Friday said it would be an “outrageous crime” if the regime used chemical weapons against the revolt. The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, the global chemical weapons watchdog, asked Damascus to sign up to a convention banning their use, citing “serious concerns” that for the first time in the agreement’s history they might be used.

The opposition Syrian National Council said even neighbouring countries would not be spared if such weapons were used.

“We ask the countries of the world to act before disaster hits, not after,” SNC chief George Sabras said.

source: http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-1-147321-Syria-warns-rebels-may-use-chemical-weapons

Saturday, October 27, 2012

Project Censored: Top 10 Underreported Stories By The Mainstream Media

(Yael Chanoff) People who get their information exclusively from mainstream media sources may be surprised at the lack of enthusiasm on the left for President Barack Obama in this crucial election. But that’s probably because they weren’t exposed to the full online furor sparked by Obama’s continuation of his predecessor’s overreaching approach to national security, such as signing the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act, which allows the indefinite detention of those accused of supporting terrorism, even U.S. citizens.

We’ll never know how this year’s election would be different if the corporate media adequately covered the NDAA’s indefinite detention clause and many other recent attacks on civil liberties. What we can do is spread the word and support independent media sources that do cover these stories. That’s where Project Censored comes in.

Project Censored has been documenting inadequate media coverage of crucial stories since it began in 1967 at Sonoma State University. Each year, the group considers hundreds of news stories submitted by readers, evaluating their merits. Students search Lexis Nexis and other databases to see if the stories were underreported, and if so, the stories are fact-checked by professors and experts in relevant fields.

A panel of academics and journalists chooses the Top 25 stories and rates their significance. The project maintains a vast online database of underreported news stories that it has “validated” and publishes them in an annual book. Censored 2013: Dispatches from the Media Revolution will be released Oct. 30.

For the second year in row, Project Censored has grouped the Top 25 list into topical “clusters.” This year, categories include “Human cost of war and violence” and “Environment and health.” Project Censored Director Mickey Huff told us the idea was to show how various undercovered stories fit together into an alternative narrative, not to say that one story was more censored than another.

In May, while Project Censored was working on the list, another 2012 list was issued: the Fortune 500 list of the biggest corporations, whose influence peppers the Project Censored list in a variety of ways.

Consider this year’s top Fortune 500 company: ExxonMobil. The oil company pollutes everywhere it goes, yet most stories about its environmental devastation go underreported. Weapons manufacturers Lockheed Martin (58 on the Fortune list), General Dynamics (92), and Raytheon (117) are tied into stories about U.S. prisoners in slavery conditions manufacturing parts for their weapons and the underreported war crimes in Afghanistan and Libya.

These powerful corporations work together more than most people think. In the chapter exploring the “global 1 percent,” writers Peter Philips and Kimberly Soeiro explain how a small number of well-connected people control the majority of the world’s wealth. In it, they use Censored story number 6, “Small network of corporations run the global economy,” to describe how a network of transnational corporations are deeply interconnected, with 147 of them controlling 40 percent of the global economy’s total wealth.

For example, Philips and Soeiro write that in one such company, BlackRock Inc., “The 18 members of the board of directors are connected to a significant part of the world’s core financial assets. Their decisions can change empires, destroy currencies and impoverish millions.”

Another cluster of stories, “Women and Gender, Race and Ethnicity,” notes a pattern of underreporting stories that affect a range of marginalized groups. This broad category includes only three articles, and none are listed in the top 10. The stories reveal mistreatment of Palestinian women in Israeli prisons, including being denied medical care and shackled during childbirth, and the rape and sexual assault of women soldiers in the U.S. military. The third story in the category concerns an Alabama anti-immigration bill, H.B. 56, that caused immigrants to flee Alabama in such numbers that farmers felt a dire need to “help farms fill the gap and find sufficient labor.” So the Alabama Department of Agriculture and Industries approached the state’s Department of Corrections about making a deal where prisoners would replace the fleeing farm workers.

But with revolutionary unrest around the world, and the rise of a mass movement that connects disparate issues together into a simple, powerful class analysis — the 99 percent versus the 1 percent paradigm popularized by Occupy Wall Street — this year’s Project Censored offers an element of hope.

It’s not easy to succeed at projects that resist corporate dominance, and when it does happen, the corporate media is sometimes reluctant to cover it. Number seven on the Top 25 list is the story of how the United Nations designated 2012 the International Year of the Cooperative, recognizing the rapid growth of co-op businesses, organizations that are part-owned by all members and whose revenue is shared equitably among members. One billion people worldwide now work in co-ops.

The Year of the Cooperative is not the only good-news story discussed by Project Censored this year. In Chapter 4, Yes! Magazine’s Sarah Van Gelder lists “12 ways the Occupy movement and other major trends have offered a foundation for a transformative future.” They include a renewed sense of “political self-respect” and fervor to organize in the United States, debunking of economic myths such as the “American dream,” and the blossoming of economic alternatives such as community land trusts, time banking and micro-energy installations.

As Dr. Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed writes in the book’s foreword, “The majority of people now hold views about Western governments and the nature of power that would have made them social pariahs 10 or 20 years ago.”

Citing polls from the corporate media, Mosaddeq writes: “The majority are now skeptical of the Iraq War; the majority want an end to U.S. military involvement in Afghanistan; the majority resent the banks and financial sector, and blame them for the financial crisis; most people are now aware of environmental issues, more than ever before, and despite denialist confusion promulgated by fossil fuel industries, the majority in the United States and Britain are deeply concerned about global warming; most people are wary of conventional party politics and disillusioned with the mainstream parliamentary system.”

“In other words,” he writes, “there has been a massive popular shift in public opinion toward a progressive critique of the current political economic system.”

And ultimately, it’s the public — not the president and not the corporations—that will determine the future. There may be hope after all. Here’s Project Censored’s Top 10 list for 2013:

1. Signs of an emerging police state

President George W. Bush is remembered largely for his role in curbing civil liberties in the name of his “war on terror.” But it’s President Obama who signed the 2012 NDAA, including its clause allowing for indefinite detention without trial for terrorism suspects. Obama promised that “my administration will interpret them to avoid the constitutional conflict” — leaving us adrift if and when the next administration chooses to interpret them otherwise. Another law of concern is the National Defense Resources Preparedness Executive Order that Obama issued in March 2012. That order authorizes the president, “in the event of a potential threat to the security of the United States, to take actions necessary to ensure the availability of adequate resources and production capability, including services and critical technology, for national defense requirements.” The president is to be advised on this course of action by “the National Security Council and Homeland Security Council, in conjunction with the National Economic Council.” Journalist Chris Hedges, along with co-plaintiffs including Noam Chomsky and Daniel Ellsberg, won a case challenging the NDAA’s indefinite detention clause on Sept. 1, when a federal judge blocked its enforcement, but her ruling was overturned on Oct. 3, so the clause is back.

2. Oceans in peril

Big banks aren’t the only entities that our country has deemed “too big to fail.” But our oceans won’t be getting a bailout anytime soon, and their collapse could compromise life itself. In a haunting article highlighted by Project Censored, Mother Jones reporter Julia Whitty paints a tenuous seascape — overfished, acidified, warming — and describes how the destruction of the ocean’s complex ecosystems jeopardizes the entire planet, not just the 70 percent that is water. Whitty compares ocean acidification, caused by global warming, to acidification that was one of the causes of the “Great Dying,” a mass extinction 252 million years ago. Life on Earth took 30 million years to recover. In a more hopeful story, a study of 14 protected and 18 non-protected ecosystems in the Mediterranean Sea showed dangerous levels of biomass depletion. But it also showed that the marine reserves were well-enforced, with five to 10 times larger fish populations than in unprotected areas. This encourages establishment and maintenance of more reserves.

3. U.S. deaths from Fukushima

A plume of toxic fallout floated to the U.S. after Japan’s tragic Fukushima nuclear disaster on March 11, 2011. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency found radiation levels in air, water and milk that were hundreds of times higher than normal across the United States. One month later, the EPA announced that radiation levels had declined, and they would cease testing. But after making a Freedom of Information Act request, journalist Lucas Hixson published emails revealing that on March 24, 2011, the task of collecting nuclear data had been handed off from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to the Nuclear Energy Institute, a nuclear industry lobbying group. And in one study that got little attention, scientists Joseph Mangano and Jeanette Sherman found that in the period following the Fukushima meltdowns, 14,000 more deaths than average were reported in the U.S., mostly among infants. Later, Mangono and Sherman updated the number to 22,000.

4. FBI agents responsible for terrorist plots

We know that FBI agents go into communities such as mosques, both undercover and in the guise of building relationships, quietly gathering information about individuals. This is part of an approach to finding what the FBI now considers the most likely kind of terrorists, “lone wolves.” Its strategy: “seeking to identify those disgruntled few who might participate in a plot given the means and the opportunity. And then, in case after case, the government provides the plot, the means, and the opportunity,” writes Mother Jones journalist Trevor Aaronsen. The publication, along with the Investigative Reporting Program at the University of California-Berkeley, examined the results of this strategy, 508 cases classified as terrorism-related that have come before the U.S. Department of Justice since the 9/11 terrorist attacks of 2001. In 243 of these cases, an informant was involved; in 49 cases, an informant actually led the plot. And “with three exceptions, all of the high-profile domestic terror plots of the last decade were actually FBI stings.”

5. Federal Reserve loaned trillions to major banks

The Federal Reserve, the U.S.’s quasi-private central bank, was audited for the first time in its history this year. The audit report states, “From late 2007 through mid-2010, Reserve Banks provided more than a trillion dollars … in emergency loans to the financial sector to address strains in credit markets and to avert failures of individual institutions believed to be a threat to the stability of the financial system.” These loans had significantly less interest and fewer conditions than the high-profile TARP bailouts, and were rife with conflicts of interest. Some examples: the CEO of JP Morgan Chase served as a board member of the New York Federal Reserve at the same time that his bank received more than $390 billion in financial assistance from the Fed. William Dudley, who is now the New York Federal Reserve president, was granted a conflict of interest waiver to let him keep investments in AIG and General Electric at the same time the companies were given bailout funds. The audit was restricted to Federal Reserve lending during the financial crisis. On July 25, 2012, a bill to audit the Fed again, with fewer limitations, authored by Rep. Ron Paul, passed the House of Representatives. H.R. 459 was expected to die in the Senate, but the movement behind Paul and his calls to hold the Fed accountable, or abolish it altogether, seem to be growing.

6. Small network of corporations run the global economy

Reporting on a study by researchers from the Swiss Federal Institute in Zurich didn’t make the rounds nearly enough, according to Censored 2013. They found that, of 43,060 transnational companies, 147 control 40 percent of total global wealth. The researchers also built a model visually demonstrating how the connections between companies — what it calls the “super entity” — works. Some have criticized the study, saying control of assets doesn’t equate to ownership. True, but as we clearly saw in the 2008 financial collapse, corporations are capable of mismanaging assets in their control to the detriment of their actual owners. And a largely unregulated super entity like this is vulnerable to global collapse.

7. The International Year of Cooperative

Can something really be censored when it’s straight from the United Nations? According to Project Censored evaluators, the corporate media underreported the U.N. declaring 2012 to be the International Year of the Cooperative, based on the co-op business model’s stunning growth. The U.N. found that, in 2012, 1 billion people worldwide are co-op member-owners, or one in five adults over age 15. The largest is Spain’s Mondragon Corporation, with more than 80,000 member-owners. The U.N. predicts that by 2025, worker-owned co-ops will be the world’s fastest growing business model. Worker-owned cooperatives provide for equitable distribution of wealth, genuine connection to the workplace, and, just maybe, a brighter future for our planet.

8. NATO war crimes in Libya

In January 2012, the BBC “revealed” how British Special Forces agents joined and “blended in” with rebels in Libya to help topple dictator Muammar Gadaffi, a story that alternative media sources had reported a year earlier. NATO admits to bombing a pipe factory in the Libyan city of Brega that was key to the water supply system that brought tap water to 70 percent of Libyans, saying that Gadaffi was storing weapons in the factory. In Censored 2013, writer James F. Tracy makes the point that historical relations between the U.S. and Libya were left out of mainstream news coverage of the NATO campaign; “background knowledge and historical context confirming Al-Qaeda and Western involvement in the destabilization of the Gadaffi regime are also essential for making sense of corporate news narratives depicting the Libyan operation as a popular ‘uprising.’”

9. Prison slavery in the U.S.

On its website, the UNICOR manufacturing corporation proudly proclaims that its products are “made in America.” That’s true, but they’re made in places in the U.S. where labor laws don’t apply, with workers often paid just 23 cents an hour to be exposed to toxic materials with no legal recourse. These places are U.S. prisons. Slavery conditions in prisons aren’t exactly news. It’s literally written into the Constitution; the 13th Amendment, which abolished slavery, outlaws “slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.” But the articles highlighted by Project Censored this year reveal the current state of prison slavery industries, and its ties to war. The majority of products manufactured by inmates are contracted to the Department of Defense. Inmates make complex parts for missile systems, battleship anti-aircraft guns and landmine sweepers, as well as night-vision goggles, body army and camouflage uniforms. Of course, this is happening in the context of record high imprisonment in the U.S., where grossly disproportionate numbers of African Americans and Latinos are imprisoned, and can’t vote even after they’re freed. As psychologist Elliot D. Cohen puts it in this year’s book: “This system of slavery, like that which existed in this country before the Civil War, is also racist, as more than 60 percent of U.S. prisoners are people of color.”

10. H.R. 347 criminalizes protest

H.R. 347, sometimes called the “criminalizing protest” or “anti-Occupy” bill, made some headlines. But concerned lawyers and other citizens worry that it could have disastrous effects for the First Amendment right to protest. Officially called the Federal Restricted Grounds Improvement Act, the law makes it a felony to “knowingly” enter a zone restricted under the law, or engage in “disorderly or disruptive” conduct in or near the zones. The restricted zones include anywhere the Secret Service may be — places such as the White House, areas hosting events deemed “National Special Security Events,” or anywhere visited by the president, vice president and their immediate families; former presidents, vice presidents and certain family members; certain foreign dignitaries; major presidential and vice presidential candidates (within 120 days of an election); and other individuals as designated by a presidential executive order. These people could be anywhere, and NSSEs have notoriously included the Democratic and Republican National Conventions, Super Bowls and the Academy Awards. So far, it seems the only time H.R. 347 has kicked in is with George Clooney’s high-profile arrest outside the Sudanese embassy. Clooney ultimately was not detained without trial — information that would be almost impossible to censor — but what about the rest of us who exist outside of the mainstream media’s spotlight?

THERE IS SOOOO MUCH MORE AT THIS WEBSITE THAT YOU MUST CHECK IT OUT!!!

HERE IS THE SITE URL...http://govtslaves.info/project-censored-top-10-underreported-stories-by-the-mainstream-media/

Thursday, October 18, 2012

Libya Suspects Islamist Group In Consulate Attack As U.S. Prepares Retaliation

Libya suspects head of Islamist group as commander of consulate attack

Posted By Mary Casey, Jennifer Parker Thursday, October 18, 2012 - 8:54 AM Share

Libyan authorities have said they suspect Ahmed Abu Khattala, the leader of Libya's Islamist militant group Ansar al-Sharia, to have led the September 11 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi. Witnesses have reported seeing Abu Khattala at the site, but his exact role is unclear, as is whether or not he shared leadership with others. But, the allegations provide the most direct link yet between Ansar al-Sharia and the assault. The F.B.I. has been investigating the attack from Tripoli, almost 400 miles from Benghazi, and a U.S. official said they had been tracking Abu Khattala who remains at large. Having not yet established central control of security since last year's revolution, Libyan authorities rely on local militias for law enforcement. The government-allied militias say that haven't been directed to arrest Abu Khattala, and the government is concerned about exacerbating tensions between rival militia groups.

Syria

Syrian human rights groups say that at least 28,000 people have "disappeared" in Syria since the beginning of the 19-month long uprising, and some estimate the number of missing to be as high as 80,000. According to a director at the online activist group Avazza, "Syrians are being plucked off the street by Syrian security forces and paramilitaries and being ‘disappeared' into torture cells. Whether it is women buying groceries or farmers going for fuel, nobody is safe." The group plans to request an investigation by the U.N. Human Rights Council. Damascus has started to feel the strain of the country's civil war, from which it had been relatively isolated until recently. Meanwhile, U.N. and Arab League envoy to Syria, Lahkdar Brahimi, has warned of regional spillover of the conflict. After meeting with Lebanese officials seeking international support for a ceasefire over an upcoming holiday, which Turkey and Iran have backed, he said, "The crisis cannot remain within Syrian borders indefinitely. Either it will be addressed or it will increase ... and be all-consuming." Brahimi's remarks came shortly before reports of Syrian and Lebanese border clashes.

source: http://mideast.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/10/18/libya_suspects_head_of_islamist_group_as_commander_of_consulate_attack

US Consulate attack in Benghazi: America ponders a strike over Libya attack

The White House, under political pressure to respond forcefully to the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Consulate inBenghazi, is readying strike forces and drones but first has to find a target.

And if the administration does find a target, officials say it still has to weigh whether the short-term payoff of exacting retribution on al-Qaida is worth the risk that such strikes could elevate the group's profile in the region, alienate governments the U.S. needs to fight the group in the future and do little to slow the growing terror threat in North Africa.

Details on the administration's position and on its search for a possible target were provided by three current and one former administration official, as well as an analyst who was approached by the White House for help. All four spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the high-level debates publicly.

In another effort to bolster Libyan security, the Pentagon and State Department have been developing a plan to train and equip a special operations force in Libya, according to a senior defense official.

The efforts show the tension of the White House's need to demonstrate it is responding forcefully to al-Qaida, balanced against its long-term plans to develop relationships and trust with local governments and build a permanent U.S. counterterrorist network in the region.

Vice President Joe Biden pledged in his debate last week with Republican vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan to find those responsible for the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi that killed U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others.

"We will find and bring to justice the men who did this," Biden said in response to a question about whether intelligence failures led to lax security around Stevens and the consulate. Referring back to the raid that killed Osama bin Laden last year, Biden said American counterterror policy should be, "if you do harm to America, we will track you to the gates of hell if need be."

The White House declined to comment on the debate over how best to respond to the Benghazi attack.

The attack has become an issue in the U.S. election season, with Republicans accusing the Obama administration of being slow to label the assault an act of terrorism and slow to strike back at those responsible. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Monday night that the security of State Department operations was her responsibility.

The White House is "aiming for a small pop, a flash in the pan, so as to be able to say, 'Hey, we're doing something about it,'" said retired Air Force Lt. Col. Rudy Attalah, the former Africa counterterrorism director for Defense Department under President George W. Bush.

US consulate in Benghazi was attacked over anti-Islam film in September 2012.

Attalah noted that in 1998, after the embassy bombing in Nairobi, the Clinton administration fired cruise missiles to take out a pharmaceutical factory in Sudan that may have been producing chemical weapons for al-Qaida.

"It was a way to say, 'Look, we did something,'" he said.

On the subject of developing a special operations unit, U.S. officials received approval from Congress well before the Benghazi attack to reprogram some funding in the budget that could be used for the commando program in Libya. But the details are still being discussed with the Libyans and also must get final approval from Congress, according to the defense official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the matter publicly.

The initial cost is estimated at about $6.2 million.

The defense official said U.S. leaders have recognized the need to train Libyan commando forces, but details such as the size, mission and composition of the forces are still being finalized.

A Washington-based analyst with extensive experience in Africa said administration officials have approached him for help in connecting the dots to Mali, whose northern half fell to al-Qaida-linked rebels this spring. They wanted to know if he could suggest potential targets, which he says he was not able to do.

"The civilian side is looking into doing something and is running into a lot of pushback from the military side," the analyst said. "The resistance that is coming from the military side is because the military has both worked in the region and trained in the region. So they are more realistic."

Islamists in the region are preparing for a reaction from the U.S.

Possible US Attack in Libya Faces Opposition

The United States consulate in Benghazi, Libya is seen in flames during an attack that killed four U.S. staffers, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens on September 11, 2012.

Elizabeth Arrott

October 17, 2012

CAIRO — The United States is said to be weighing the option of a military strike against those found responsible for the September 11 attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya that killed four American embassy personnel dead, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens.

One of the first hurdles they face is identifying who carried out the attack. The main suspects in the case, the militant Ansar al Sharia, have denied responsibility, despite witness accounts of their involvement. They are but one of dozens of militias across Libya that lie beyond government control.

But some analysts warn of the consequences to the fledgling Libyan state should the United States intervene. The former opposition spokesman during last year's uprising, Mustafa Gheriani, argues any justice must be served by Libya itself.

“If you want to be a country of law and not to be like Afghanistan or Pakistan, then we need to take matters through the proper channels," Gheriani said. "It might be later date if there is a question about their strength at the present time, but definitely not to have anything irrational taking place at this moment.”

The compound attack plays large in the American presidential campaign, raising concerns the United States could act soon. But Washington also has longer term plans in Libya, including training a core Libyan military group aimed at reining in the militias.

Political analyst Said Sadek of the American University in Cairo says a danger of this tack is it could make the Libyan government appear a puppet of the Americans. It also would negate a key point of the NATO mission that helped bring the new government to power - keeping foreign troops off Libyan soil.

Sadek believes a faster and more practical solution would be a political effort to unite competing militias against extremists - a practice dubbed al sahawat, or awakening - that the United States tried in Iraq.

“It will take a long time to prepare and get a professional force ready for action and stability in the country," said Sadek. "So the only option for them in the short term, in the immediate urgency of the matter, is to try al sahawat experience from Iraq and try to apply it in Libya,” he said.

Libya's prime minister-designate has vowed to tackle the security problem, calling it the nation's foremost problem.
Ali Zeidan said earlier this week the key will be an inclusive government.

But Islamist militias are not the only groups whose role is threatening to undermine Libya's democratic future.

source: http://www.voanews.com/content/possible-us-attack-in-libya-faces-opposition/1528142.html

White House reportedly preps strike team to take out terrorists tied to Libya attack

Published October 15, 2012

Associated Press

WASHINGTON – The White House has put special operations strike forces on standby and moved drones into the skies above Africa, ready to strike militant targets from Libya to Mali — if investigators can find the Al Qaeda-linked group responsible for the death of the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans in Libya.

But officials say the administration, with weeks until the presidential election, is weighing whether the short-term payoff of exacting retribution on Al Qaeda is worth the risk that such strikes could elevate the group's profile in the region, alienate governments the U.S. needs to fight it in the future and do little to slow the growing terror threat in North Africa.

The dilemma shows the tension of the White House's need to demonstrate it is responding forcefully to Al Qaeda, balanced against its long-term plans to develop relationships and trust with local governments and build a permanent U.S. counterterrorist network in the region.

The White House declined to comment on the debate over how best to respond to the Benghazi attack.

The attack has become an issue in the U.S. election season, with Republicans accusing the Obama administration of being slow to label the assault an act of terrorism early on, and slow to strike back at those responsible.

"They are aiming for a small pop, a flash in the pan, so as to be able to say, 'Hey, we're doing something about it,'" said retired Air Force Lt. Col. Rudy Attalah, the former Africa counterterrorism director for the Department of Defense under President George W. Bush.

"It was a way to say, 'Look, we did something,'" he said.

A Washington-based analyst with extensive experience in Africa said that administration officials have approached him asking for help in connecting the dots to Mali, whose northern half fell to Al Qaeda-linked rebels this spring. They wanted to know if he could suggest potential targets, which he says he was not able to do.

"The civilian side is looking into doing something, and is running into a lot of pushback from the military side," the analyst said. "The resistance that is coming from the military side is because the military has both worked in the region and trained in the region. So they are more realistic."

Islamists in the region are preparing for a reaction from the U.S.

"If America hits us, I promise you that we will multiply the Sept. 11 attack by 10," said Oumar Ould Hamaha, a spokesman for the Islamists in northern Mali, while denying that his group or Al Qaeda fighters based in Mali played a role in the Benghazi attack.

Finding the militants who overwhelmed a small security force at the consulate isn't going to be easy.

The key suspects are members of the Libyan militia group Ansar al-Shariah. The group has denied responsibility, but eyewitnesses saw Ansar fighters at the consulate, and U.S. intelligence intercepted phone calls after the attack from Ansar fighters to leaders of Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, or AQIM, bragging about it. The affiliate's leaders are known to be mostly in northern Mali, where they have seized a territory as large as Texas following a coup in the country's capital.

But U.S. investigators have only loosely linked "one or two names" to the attack, and they lack proof that it was planned ahead of time, or that the local fighters had any help from the larger Al Qaeda affiliate, officials say.

If that proof is found, the White House must decide whether to ask Libyan security forces to arrest the suspects with an eye to extraditing them to the U.S. for trial, or to simply target the suspects with U.S. covert action.

U.S. officials say covert action is more likely. The FBI couldn't gain access to the consulate until weeks after the attack, so it is unlikely it will be able to build a strong criminal case. The U.S. is also leery of trusting the arrest and questioning of the suspects to the fledgling Libyan security forces and legal system still building after the overthrow of Moammar Gadhafi in 2011.

The burden of proof for U.S. covert action is far lower, but action by the CIA or special operations forces still requires a body of evidence that shows the suspect either took part in the violence or presents a "continuing and persistent, imminent threat" to U.S. targets, current and former officials said.

"If the people who were targeted were themselves directly complicit in this attack or directly affiliated with a group strongly implicated in the attack, then you can make an argument of imminence of threat," said Robert Grenier, former director of the CIA's Counterterrorism Center.

But if the U.S. acts alone to target them in Africa, " it raises all kinds of sovereignty issues ... and makes people very uncomfortable," said Grenier, who has criticized the CIA's heavy use of drones in Pakistan without that government's support.

Even a strike that happens with permission could prove problematic, especially in Libya or Mali where Al Qaeda supporters are currently based. Both countries have fragile, interim governments that could lose popular support if they are seen allowing the U.S. unfettered access to hunt Al Qaeda.

The Libyan government is so wary of the U.S. investigation expanding into unilateral action that it refused requests to arm the drones now being flown over Libya. Libyan officials have complained publicly that they were unaware of how large the U.S. intelligence presence was in Benghazi until a couple of dozen U.S. officials showed up at the airport after the attack, waiting to be evacuated — roughly twice the number of U.S. staff the Libyans thought were there. A number of those waiting to be evacuated worked for U.S. intelligence, according to two American officials.

In Mali, U.S. officials have urged the government to allow special operations trainers to return, to work with Mali's forces to push Al Qaeda out of that country's northern area. AQIM is among the groups that filled the power vacuum after a coup by rebellious Malian forces in March. U.S. special operations forces trainers left Mali just days after the coup. While such trainers have not been invited to return, the U.S. has expanded its intelligence effort on Mali, focusing satellite and spy flights over the contested northern region to track and map the militant groups vying for control of the territory, officials say.

Issues On Call

Ad